CIRCUMVENT THE MESSY AND IRRITATING GREASE: THE

EFFECTIVITY OF THE TWO-WAY SPONGE

PROCORATO, POCHOLO JAKE M.

THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE INSTITUTE OF

TEACHER EDUCATION ARTS AND SCIENCES, DAVAO DEL
SUR STATE COLLEGE, DIGOS CITY, IN PARTIAL
FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY AND LIVELIHOOD EDUCATION

MAJOR in HOME ECONOMICS

NOVEMBER, 2021
 APPROVAL SHEET

This thesis entitled “Circumvent the Messy and Irritating Grease: The effectivity
of the Two-Way Sponge,” prepared and submitted by Pocholo Jake M. Procorato
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Technology
and Livelihood Education major in Home Economics, is hereby accepted.

ARIEL C BALIO JR., LPT MARY LISLEY JANE REYES

Member Member

__________________ __________________
Date Signed Date Signed

JASMIN MACAPA-AR DR. JUDE TRONDILLO

Adviser Chairman

__________________ __________________
Date Signed Date Signed

Accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Bachelor of Technology and Livelihood Education major in Home Economics.

CINDY B. ROSIL, ED. D

Dean
Institute of Teacher Education and Arts and Sciences
Davao del Sur State College (DSSC),
Brgy. Matti, Digos City

____________________
Date Signed
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

PRELIMINARY PAGES PAGE

TITLE PAGE i
APPROVAL SHEET ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iii
LIST OF FIGURE v
LIST OF APPENDICES vi

CHAPTER
I. THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction 1
Objectives of the Study 3
Significance of the Study 4
Scope and Limitation of the Study 5
Definition of Terms 6

II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Review of related Literatures and studies 7

Related Studies 45
Prior Art 1 50
Prior Art 2 51
Prior Art 3 52
State of the art landscape 53
Synthesis 54
Theoretical Framework 56
Conceptual Framework 57
Definition of Terms 58

III. DEVELOPMENTAL AND EVALUATION OF THE PROJECT

Testing and Evaluation 59

Project Design Phase 64
Supplies and Materials 66
Tools and Equipment 66
Developmental Phase 67
Construction Time Frame 67
Project Cost 68
 Evaluation Phase 69
Research Method 69
Research Instrument 70
Research Locale 72
Data Gathering Procedure 69
Evaluation of the Project 69
Statistical and Analysis Data 70

LITERATURE CITED 71

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE PAGE

1 The Technical Field of prior Patented Technologies 53

2 Supplies and materials of Two-Way Sponge 60

3 List of Tools and Equipments of the Two-Way 61

Sponge

4 Construction Time Frame of Two-Way Sponge 63

5 Cost of Supplies and Material of Two-Way Sponge 64

6 Project Cost of Two-Way Sponge 64

 LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE PAGE

1 Steps in Safety Dish washing 9

2 Bacteria Development and survival on Sponge and 12

Brush

3 Bacteria Found in Sponge and Brush 15

4 Sponge for Oil and water mixture durability 19

5 Sponges Immersion in a Solution 24

6 Choice of cleaning utensil for washing the dishes in 10 29

European  countries, based on a web-based survey
with 9966 respondents. Numbers shown are %  of
respondents. (Original question: “Typically: How do
you wash up or clean dirty  dishes?”) 

7 Total numbers of bacteria (A), Salmonella (B) and 33

Campylobacter (C) in three types of sponges (S) and
one type of brush (B) initially and after 1, 3 and 7
days of storage.

8 Prior Art 1 49

9 Prior Art 2 50

10 Prior Art 3 51

11 State-of-the-Art-Landscape 52

12 The Conceptual Framework of the Two-way Sponge 56

13 New Process flow of Safety Dishwashing 59

 Chapter 1

Introduction

The Problem and its Background

To remove food residues from kitchen equipment, prewashing and washing stages

are normally carried out with sponges. Some components of the food remains may

attach to the sponges over time. The silicone material is designed to be soft on your

dish surfaces, making it simple to clean and odor-free. It is robust and comfortable to

grip, with high scrubbing strength that can clean objects that are generally difficult to

clean, they're absorbent, inexpensive, disposable, replaceable, and grime-resistant.

Some sponges are similarly inexpensive. Perspective, money, and lifestyle all play a

role in selecting the ideal brand for your house. Grease cannot be removed by water

alone because water molecules do not adhere to grease molecules. And a little elbow

grease isn't always enough to get rid of baked-on crud in a busy kitchen. Commercial

grease cleansers can handle most problems, but what can you do if you don't have

any on hand, what else you can do? You may not see it right away, but a few days

later, when standing in the kitchen with a glass of wine, you notice it: a spatter, a

puddle, a streak of stuck-on, difficult-to-remove, inconvenient oil and grease.

Consumers mostly change their sponges at regular times, but also

 2

sensory cues (looks dirty,smelly, slimy) and usage occurrences such as wiping up

meat juices may trigger replacement. Besides cleaning the dishes, over a quarter of

the dish brush users also use it to clean a chopping board after soilage from chicken

meat juices. The water uptake and drying rate varied considerably, both between

different sponges and between brushes and sponges, where brushes dried

fastest. Campylobacter survived one day in all sponges and Salmonella more than

seven days in two of three types of sponges. In the type of sponge that dried

slowest, Salmonella grew on the first day and was always found in higher levels than

in the other sponges. In brushes all types of bacteria died over

time. Campylobacter and Salmonella were reduced by more than 2.5 log to below the

detection limit after one and three days, respectively. Bacteriota studies revealed a

tendency for a dominance by Gram-negative bacteria and a shift to high relative

prevalence of Pseudomonas over time in sponges. Both enumeration by agar plating

and bacteriota analysis confirmed that the pathogens were in a minority compared to

the other bacteria. Contaminated sponges or brushes should be replaced or cleaned

when they may have been in contact with pathogenic microorganisms, e.g. used on

raw food spills. Cleaning of sponges and brushes with chlorine, boiling or dishwasher

may be a safe alternative to replacing them with new ones.

Objectives of the study

 3

This project study aims to test the functionality of the innovative two-way sponge

which was designed to ease the problem on washing dishes that has a greasy surfaces

and oil that may became a cause of serious illness due to bacteria, an ideal tool to use

for multi-purpose on washing dishes and some kitchen utensils, a device that will be

convenient to use.

Specifically, this study has the following objectives:

1. To see if the two-way sponge and brush is up to the task at hand.

2. To test the functionality of the two-way sponge and brush in terms of;

2.1. Durability

2.2. Longevity

2.3 Efficiency

3. Determine if the two way sponge and brush is functional

4. Identifying the defect of the device

5. Gathering feed backs of the device to innovate it more.

Significance of the study

The project study will be significant to the following:

 4

TESDA Cookery/Bread and Pastry Production. This project study can help the

TESDA trainor and trainees during demonstration and assessment when they

conduct 5’s in their work place.

TLE Teachers. This can help the Technical and Livelihood Education Teachers to

teach the students about the practice of proper hygiene in the kitchen or in the

laboratory room especially in dishwashing.

Household Cooks. This can help the family in washing dishes and ensuring the

cleanliness of their utensils and promote a healthy and safe eating with their kitchen

utensils

Cookery Students. This project study will help the students to their choirs in their

respective houses and help them in their cooking demonstrations in school.

Eatery owners. This will help them to ease the messy grease from food and other

objects that can be a nuisance in washing dishes so it can give them a speed in time.

Future researchers. This will help the future researches on their basis in their

research content inline in this type of problem.

Scope and Delimitation of the study

The functioning of the two-way sponge and brush will be tested in this investigation.

A cleaning tool with a holder and detachable features that may assist other citizens in

their job of washing dishes. It comes with a holder for convenience while washing

dishes, as well as a detachable sponge that allows you to choose between brush and
 5

sponge depending on the type of kitchen utensils you intend to clean and it comes

with a hole to hang the product in a wall so some rodents and other insects will not

land on it also it is more easier to clean the sponge and the brush to wash out the

bacteria that may became the sponge a breeding ground of it. This can assist

restaurant owners, eatery owners, and students in using this product in their homes

and businesses that require dishwashing. This project study will not accommodate

small round kitchen objects like glass, mug and bowls because this will only clean

flat surfaces like plates, spoon, fork, knives, and chopping boards also this may can

clean some round objects as much as bigger than the cleaning tool. This cleaning tool

can help people switch easily form brush to sponge or sponge to brush to wash more

efficiently the dishes without any unwanted residue that left in the dishes that may

became a breeding ground of the bacteria and can cause some serious illness to our

body.

Chapter II

This chapter on the conceptual framework presents the review of related literature

and studies, research paradigm, and definition of terms.

Review of Related Literature and Studies

 6

Sponges are frequently used in kitchens and have been shown to harbor large

numbers of bacteria, occasionally also pathogens. Less is known about kitchen

brushes regarding usage and presence of bacteria. Foodborne disease is an illness that

happen because consumption of contaminated food and when the food contaminated

with pathogenic bacteria, parasites and viruses. A Foodborne illness worldwide

increasing and it may origin many healthiness and productive erosion. There is major

foodborne pathogens that causing illness are salmonella nontyphoidal,

Campylobacter and, Listeria. Food sanitation like washing dishes also extends to

keeping the preparation area clean and germ free. Food contact areas should be clean

before and after preparing the food.

Kitchen utensils like plates, cutting board, knives, mixing bowls, spoon and fork etc.

should be washed before use. Kitchen slabs should be cleaned each and every use

because it prevent the bacteria on spreading. There is a increase number of food

borne diseases, now the governments all over the world have been taking initiate to

overcome these problems and improve the knowledge about the hygiene and

sanitation practices in households.

Which reduces the great occurrence of diahoreal death and many other food born

illnesses. The poor food hygiene practices is a major risk of increasing the disease .In

India religious practices play a presiding role in food handling practices. The food
 7

handling methods take on by the women during religious and social rituals practices

are not good to safeguard the food. The component which increase the risk of illness

are unsafe keeping of food (time and temperature),poor personal hygiene

,contaminated utensils and inadequate cooking. At the household level the role of

mothers is well acquire and perception of the status of their food handling knowledge

and practices is needed.

A study shows that food handlers have inadequate knowledge and measure needed to

protect food born diseases in the home. A healthy and evenly balanced diet is crucial

for a better health.

If the peoples taking a good amount of food stuff but it are not nutritionally balanced

it may lead to many illness and peoples may become undernourished. Children and

women are more unprotected to poor nutrition .undernourishment can lower the

performance and make them more likely to suffer from infectious disease. Today ,in

all nations foodborne illnesses is amid the major issue which hazard good health.

Food borne diseases greatly influence people’s health.

And their unhealthy outcome are bounce back on the development , foreign trade and

national economy. In low level developed countries ,numerous peoples are suffering

from diseases due to utilization of food which happened underneath unsanitary

condition .Even in developed countries there is lack of health education ,improper

food stock condition, absence of hygiene and sanitation in kitchen utensils.

 8

Gathering all dishes that need to wash and

clean

Cleaning it first with running water

arranging it to their respective types of

kitchen utensils

Washing the kitchen utensils with sponge or

brush depends on what type of kitchen
utensil you intended to clean

If there is a hard substance or grease that

sticks to the kitchen utensil you need to
change or looking for another sponge or
brush anywhere

Rinsed the washed kitchen utensils and put it

to a plate rack for drying
 9

Figure 1 Steps in Safety Dishwashing

Figure 1 Steps in Safety Dishwashing

Related Literatures

Dishwashing is a typical hygiene technique that is required after eating or

using kitchen tools and equipment to prevent the growth of bacteria and to remove

other undesired objects from the kitchen utensils in order to assure safety and avoid

illness. Sponges and brushes are the most frequent cleaning tools for kitchen

equipment. They arrived in a variety of colors, sizes, and prices, and they were

matched with dishwashing soaps and liquids, but are these instruments in some study

is believed not sufficient to clean kitchen utensils. Dishwashing is vital because it

stops bacteria from growing in your kitchen. It also improves the appearance of your

kitchen and eliminates any scents caused by dirty dishes but the sponge itself puts a

big disadvantage.
 10

Furthermore, if you clean your dishes on a regular basis, your kitchen will

appear and feel more organized. Consumers typically use kitchen sponges for

dishwashing and scouring pans and casseroles, but they can also be used to clean

kitchen surfaces such as sinks, refrigerators, and stovetops. Consumer-collected

sponges can have high bacterial counts, ranging from 6 to 9 log CFU. In used

sponges, a diverse variety of non-pathogenic and opportunistic pathogenic bacteria,

viruses, Archeae, and Eukaryota have been discovered. Salmonella and

Campylobacter, both dangerous bacteria, have also been found. While sponges are

used to remove food soils and reduce bacterial counts, germs, including pathogens,

may be transferred to surfaces. Sponges collect a lot of water and other liquids.

Sponges are typically damp after use, allowing germs to thrive, but quick drying can

help to reduce or remove bacteria.

In the scientific literature, there is insufficient information linking sponge

water intake and drying capabilities to harmful bacteria growth and survival. Brushes

are likely to absorb less water than sponges, but further research is needed to

understand how this affects bacterial growth and survival. More information about

the survival and growth of pathogenic bacteria in kitchen brushes and sponges, as

well as consumer practices for using and managing these items, is needed to provide

risk-reducing guidance to consumers. In this study, we looked at how sponges and

brushes are used by European customers and tested several types of sponges and

brushes for water uptake, drying capabilities, Salmonella and Campylobacter growth

and survival, as well as other kitchen-related bacteria.

 11

More information about the survival and growth of pathogenic bacteria in

kitchen brushes and sponges, as well as consumer practices for using and managing

these items, is needed to provide risk-reducing guidance to consumers. In this study,

this is sought to take a closer lens how Filipinos use sponges and brushes, as well as

analyze different types of sponges and brushes for water uptake, drying capabilities,

and bacteria development and survival.

 12

Figure 2 Bacteria development and survival on Sponge and Brush

 13

Two-way sponge and brush is up to the task at hand

The two-way sponge and brush is up to the task at hand. Sponge and brushes

are typical tools that have bristles, wire, or other filaments in them. It usually

comprises of a handle or block to which filaments are attached in a longitudinal or

opposing orientation, relying on how the brush will be grasped while in use. Both the

block and the bristles or filaments are made of materials that can endure the risks of

their intended function, such as corrosive chemicals, heat, and abrasion. It's used for

cleaning, hair grooming, make-up, painting, and surface finishing, among other

things. It is one of the most basic and adaptable instruments in use today, with dozens

of variations in the ordinary household.

The staple or anchor set brush is a common method of setting the bristles, or

brush filaments, in the brush, in which the filament is forced into a hole with a

special driver by the middle of a staple and held there by the pressure against all of

the hole's walls and the portions of the staple nailed to the bottom of the hole. The

staple can be replaced with a type of anchor, which is a piece of rectangular profile

wire secured to the hole's wall, similar to how most toothbrushes work. A fused brush

is another approach to attach the bristles to the surface; instead of being put through a

hole, a plastic fiber is welded to another plastic surface, allowing varied sizes of

bristles to be used in the same brush.

Keeping your cleaning utensils hygienic and safe is just as vital as any other

cleaning activity around the house, after all, a dish or a surface is only as clean as the

sponge you wipe it with.  You should wash and sanitize your cleaning materials on a
 14

regular basis, whether you use a microfiber cleaning cloth or a standard dishwashing

sponge. It's not a good sign if your sponge smells foul; it suggests there's a higher

danger of bacteria growth. Cleaning your sponges a few times a week will give you

the best benefits. Make sure the sponge doesn't have any metal shards embedded in it,

and use caution with this procedure because the sponge can burn if it isn't thoroughly

wet. Remove the sponge with caution, as it will be extremely hot. Because it is quick

and effective, this is a popular solution.

Everyone has a preference and an opinion about which cleaning tools are best

for specific household tasks. Some people use dish sponges for dishwashing, while

others prefer to wipe off kitchen counters with rags. In terms of cleanliness, there isn't

much of a difference between dishwashing sponges and dishcloths; both can contain

germs if not cleaned on a regular basis. Now that you know what to do, make sure the

utensils are as clean as possible. Once you know how, sanitizing cloths and sponges

is simple and quick, and it's an important part of maintaining a clean, sanitary house.

One should be able to complete the task in minutes following the cleaning guidelines.

Sponges make short work of anything from hand-washing dishes to scrubbing

counters, yet some people are still hesitant to use them because they have an

unpleasant connotation. The idea of using the same soiled sponge is distasteful to

many homeowners, and there's a good reason for it.

As it turns out, the average kitchen sponge is one of the dirtiest products in

the house, according to germ specialists. According to a 2017 study published in the

journal Scientific Reports, samples retrieved from kitchen sponges had up to 45

 15

billion bacteria per square centimeter. If that's not enough to convince you to chuck

that filthy sponge, consider this: according to past studies, your kitchen sponge is

dirtier than your toilet seat.

Figure 3 Bacteria found in Sponge and Brush

To prevent bacterial growth, properly rinse and wring sponges after use, then

place them in an open dish with plenty of air to dry completely. Also, remember to

change them every two weeks. Another option is to start using better-for-you sponges

in your own kitchen, which is becoming increasingly popular. These options are less

likely to support bacteria growth since they have fewer crevices and are constructed
 16

of quick-drying materials like silicon, bamboo, and bristles. Because they're less

porous, they're also easier to clean, and many of them can withstand hot water cycles

in your dishwasher or washing machine for more thorough and regular cleaning.

Many of the items are manufactured from environmentally friendly materials, so

they're good for the environment as well as your home.

There is no such thing as a "one-size-fits-all" cleaning sponge. In practice,

there are a surprising number of sponges available for cleaning activities, each with

its own set of advantages. Cellulose sponges are among the most common and

inexpensive sponges available. They're perfect for a variety of chores because of their

vivid colors and hand-sized shapes. Cellulose sponges are affordable, absorb well,

and may be used for a variety of tasks.

Abrasive sponges can be cellulose sponges with an additional abrasive layer

or a thin sheet of abrasive material. These sponges are ideal for cleaning barbecues

and patio furniture. Abrasive sponges are designed to remove stuck-on food or debris,

and they're especially useful for cleaning baked-on food from pots and pans. When

cleaning delicate glass or pots with a non-stick coating that can be damaged by

abrasive material, however, abrasive sponges should be avoided.

Many of these sponges are color-coded to indicate how tough they are.

Unfortunately, there is no standard for the color-coded system between companies or

even within a single brand. Your best bet is to read the box carefully to see if the

abrasive sponge is appropriate for your surfaces.

Pop-up sponges are cellulose sponges that have been compressed. Prior to
 17

packaging, these sponges are dry and have had all of the air sucked out of them.

When you put the sponge in water, it rehydrates and transforms into a regular

cellulose sponge. Some purchasers prefer compressed cellulose sponges because they

aren't frequently treated with soap other biocide compounds, though it's advisable to

double-check the manufacturer's product description. Compressed cellulose sponges,

on the other hand, are frequently more expensive than other sponges.

Natural sponges are obtained by harvesting them from the sea. They are

generally more expensive to buy and harder to come by than other sponges, though

they are frequently available at home improvement and paint supply stores. These

sponges are perfect for cleaning windows and huge spills because they are very

absorbent. Natural sponges are long-lasting and can live for years if properly cared

for.

To keep the sponge moist in the packaging, dry sponges are constructed of a

rubber mixture with soap added. These sponges are designed to be used dry, making

them an excellent choice for cleaning surfaces that are sensitive to moisture and

water. After a fire, dry sponges are routinely used to wipe soot from surfaces. They

can also be used to clean wallpapered walls and window treatments made of cloth.

Dry sponges should be kept in firmly sealed plastic bags to avoid hardening.

Durability

The kitchen sponges, however, will not last indefinitely, no matter how

diligently an individual clean. It is advised to clean the two-way sponge once a week,

and throw poor ones every two to three weeks, depending on how often it is used.
 18

Even though analytical chemistry is constantly improving in terms of instruments,

sample preparation is still regarded the bottleneck of analytical procedures. To that

purpose, researchers are developing new sorbent materials to improve and replace

existing ones, with the ultimate goal of improving and enhancing current product. A

few years ago, a new trend in sample preparation emerged; the use of sponges or

sponge-like materials. These materials have advantages such as low weight, an open-

hole structure, a large surface area, and changing surface chemistry.

Figure 4 Sponge for Oil and Water Mixture Durability

Despite the fact that manufacturer employment appeared promising at first,

the trend rapidly reversed, owing to either the increased use of nanomaterials in

sample preparation or the limited scope of the first materials. With the development

of materials, such as melamine sponges, and advances in nanotechnology, this

material has been revitalized, and numerous functionalization’s on such materials

have been carried out. The novel materials are employed as sorbents in analytical
 19

chemistry sample preparation. This review looks at how such materials have evolved

over time, from the past to the present, and into the future, as well as how they are

used in analytical chemistry.

Many scientists regard sponge sample preparation to be an important element

of the analytical procedure since it improves the quality of the results. Others

consider sample preparation to be the bottleneck of analytical chemistry since it

necessitates labor-intensive stages, restricting productivity. Nonetheless, sample

preparation is becoming increasingly important in order to meet the demands of

varied matrices in analysis.

Researchers are inventing new sorbent materials to improve and replace old

ones, with the ultimate goal of improving present processes and making them more

efficient and effective, because the underlying principles of sample preparation

remain the same. To this end, sponge or sponge-like materials, such as foams, were

first used in sample preparation in the 1990s. These materials have advantages such

as low weight, an open-hole structure, a large surface area, and changing surface

chemistry. As a result, a new pattern emerged, with many reports being released at

their height between 1997 and 2003. The capacity of these materials to be compacted

into mini-columns and employed under the solid-phase extraction principle was the

main feature that raised their popularity and launched the trend. Despite the fact that

their use appeared to be promising at the time, the trend was quickly reversed, and

the number of reports dropped dramatically. 

The current tendency appears to be toward alternative sponge-like materials.

 20

Carbon-based foam is one such substance. Melamine–formaldehyde polymer foams

were annealed at 800°C in a nitrogen environment to create carbon foams in one

study. The carbon foams obtained had the same three-dimensional interconnected

network as the original foams, and they were made up of nitrogen and carbon atoms,

with mild hydrophobicity. More hydrophobic carbon foams would be produced if the

synthesis temperature was increased to over 1000C. The carbonf oams were

employed to extract phenolic endocrine-disrupting chemicals including bisphenol A,

4-tert-octylphenol, and 4-n-nonylphenol from water samples because of their

hydrophobicity, which gives them an excellent affinity for moderately polar phenols.

For experiments employing well water, leachates, and wastewater, the

recoveries were found to be greater than 90%. When compared to PUFs and MeS

preconcentration, the usage of synthetic carbon foams resulted in higher

preconcentration factors. GO polypyrrole foams were produced and employed in

pipette-tip SPE methods in two more experiments. The polypyrrole was synthesized

first, then combined with a GO solution for 24 hours in the first case. Despite the fact

that the final product was in powder form, scanning electron scans revealed that the

morphology was loose three-dimensional foam.

Three auxins were extracted from papaya juice using GO polypyrrole foams.

In the second scenario, the pyrrole polymerization was carried out in the presence of

GO, resulting in a significant reduction in the time required to prepare the GO

polypyrrole foams. Seven sulfonamides were extracted from milk and honey samples

using the aforementioned GO polypyrrole foams. To remove proteins and fat,

 21

acetonitrile and hexane were added to the samples in that order. The proposed method

uses only 3 mg of adsorbent and takes only 3 minutes to complete the extraction

stage, which are both significant advantages of the presented method.

Despite the method's many advantages, it still has to be improved in order to

improve its performance. Another example is the freeze-drying of a GO dispersion to

produce a GO sponge, which was then reduced to generate a graphene sponge using

hydrazine. When compared to graphene sponge, SEM pictures revealed that the GO

sponge had a more compact structure, which was attributed to the interactions of the

oxygen-containing groups. A smooth structure and a porous three-dimensional open-

hole structure were found in both situations. The authors were able to recover six

organic UV filters from water and personal care items using graphene sponges and

the solid-phase extraction technique.

The SEM scans revealed that the foam material contains multiple "bubbles,"

some intact and others fractured, that help the foam material interact with analytes

not only on the surface but also in the internal holes, cavities, and channels. The

carbon foam produced was utilized to extract five polyaromatichydro carbons from

wastewater samples using a stir-bar-supported micro-solid-phase extraction

technique. Carbon foam performed similarly to multiwalled carbon nanotubes and

graphene, but its synthesis is faster and less expensive, making it a good alternate

towards the other two nanomaterials.

Longevity
 22

In another study, grapehene modified MeS were functionalized with

-cyclodextrin in another investigation. Multiple steps were involved in the synthesis

process: MeS was first immersed in a GO solution and then dried. The sponges were

then immersed in a solution of -cyclodextrin that had been previously modified with

aminopropyl tetraethoxysilane for 2 hours before being removed and allowed to dry

overnight. The modification method was carried out once more, yielding the final

product.

In order to extract flavonoids, sponges were utilized. The produced substance

is novel and has some benefits, but it takes a long time to synthesize. It was also

suggested that MeS be functionalized using -cyclodextrin and graphene. A MeScube

was introduced to a -cyclodextrin and graphene dispersion, and the pH was adjusted

to 10 using ammonia solution. The modified MeS was dried after adding hydrazine

and heating it. Malachite green could be extracted using the sponges that have been

designed. The presence of -cyclodextrin was discovered to have a significant impact

on adsorption, as sponges made with less -cyclodextrin had decreased sorption

efficiency. Malachite green was extracted from fresh crayfish and squid extracts

using sponges. To extract malachite green, whrein samples were homogenized and

acetonitrile was added.

 23

Figure 5 Sponges immersion in a solution

The usage of carboxylated multi-walled carbon nanotubes and the metal–

organic framework MIL-101 was another kind of functionalization for MeS described

(Cr). Mixing carboxylated multi-walled carbon nanotubes, MIL-101(Cr), and

polyvinylidene difluoride, as well as nimmersing MeS into the final solution, were

used in the synthesis. Since maize was crushed to a fine powder and hexane was

utilized to extract the compounds, the modified sponges were used in a SPE process

to extract six triazines from corn extracts.

After that, the sponges were rinsed and dried before being utilized, and the

mixture was left at 4°C for 4.5 hours. Stirring was avoided during the synthesis

process to prevent the production of polyaniline agglomerates in the MeS. The

 24

modified MeS was reported to be effective in extracting perfluorooctanoic acid and

perfluorooctane sulfonate from human urine and serum that had been deproteinized

with acetonitrile. In another work, the silanization of MeS with trichloromethylsilane

was completed in 10 minutes using a similar easy approach. After silanization, the

sponges became hydrophobic, allowing for the extraction of benzene, toluene,

ethylbenzene, m-xylene, and o-xylene. Because benzene adsorbed less efficiently

than m-xylene, the adsorption was mostly reliant on hydrophobic interactions.

Following the development of a needle-trap extraction method, an analytical

approach with low detection limits was created. On the surface of MeS, layered

double hydroxides were generated in a more complicated investigation. To

accomplish so, the Co(II)/2-methylimidazole porous coordination polymers were first

immobilized on MeS and used as a source of Co before being used to produce Ni–Co

layered double hydroxides on the MeS. The applicability of the produced sponges in

sample preparation was tested using three phenolic acids: gallic, p-hydroxybenzoic,

and caffeic acid. The produced layered double hydroxides were dissolved during the

elution, which is significant.

A simple and effective analytical approach was devised as a result of the good

analytical figures of merit. Because of the increased surface area, the composite

material outperformed the extraction with bare layered double hydroxides. This is

possibly one of the reasons why sponges and sponge-like materials are becoming

more popular again, because existing compounds can have their surface area enlarged

by "depositing" them onto sponges.

 25

Finally, Liu et al. created silica monoliths on MeS's surface. The sponges

were then heated after being dipped in a hydrolyzed mixture of tetramethoxysilane

and vinyltrimethoxysilane including polyethylene glycol, urea, and acetic acid. To

make the sponges appropriate for dipeptide extraction, they were modified with 3

mercapto 1 ropanesulfonic acid, which allowed the sulfonate groups to interact with

the peptides' free amine groups.

Enhanced mechanical capabilities of the sponge may be caused by the

creation of a higher crosslinking degree than DPNR1, making the sponge DPNR3

stronger than the rubber DPNR111. As a result of the production of a three-

dimensional structure by crosslinking, natural rubber with a higher degree of

crosslinking is better able to tolerate external stresses on the sponge. Rubber's

characteristics will also transition from plastic to elastic. Vulcanization with sulfur

produces poliisopren chains that are covalently bonded by groups of mono-, di-, and

polysulfide.

Increased elasticity of DPNR as demonstrated by a 100 percent and 300

percent increase in modulus. This suggests that the DPNR3 rubber is more elastic

than the DPNR1 rubber. This occurs because the DPNR poliisopren chain has a

higher degree of regularity than natural rubber, resulting in improved elasticity. This

corresponds to Kadir's (1994) assertion that removing the protein content from

natural rubber reduces the value of creep, stress relaxation, and compression set while

increasing bounce ability. The influence of the density of crosslinking degree that

happens during vulcanization causes an increase in the mechanical properties of

 26

DPNR, making the rubber more durable and resistant to the applied load.

Efficiency

Sponges are commonly used in kitchens and have been reported to retain huge

amounts of bacteria, as well as diseases on rare occasions. The use of kitchen brushes

and the prevalence of microorganisms are less well understood. The use of sponges

and brushes was investigated in this study using a survey of 9966 European

consumers from 10 countries, as well as laboratory investigations on the development

and survival of bacteria in sponges and brushes.

Sponges were the most popular hand-cleaning instruments in the majority of

countries, with brushes being the most popular in Denmark and Norway. Consumers

often replace sponges on a regular basis, but sensory signals (dirty, smelly, slimy) and

usage situations like wiping off meat juices might also prompt replacement. Over a

quarter of dish brush users additionally use it to clean a cutting board following

soilage from chicken flesh fluids, in addition to washing the dishes.

Both the water intake and drying rate differed significantly between sponges

and brushes and sponges, with brushes drying the fastest. In all sponges,

Campylobacter lived for one day, but Salmonella survived for more than seven days

in two of the three sponge types. Salmonella grew on the first day in the sponge that

dried the slowest, and was always discovered at higher quantities than in the other

sponges. The sponges grew non-pathogenic bacteria to levels of roughly 9 log CFU

sponge. Bacteria of all kinds died in brushes over time. After one and three days,

Campylobacter and Salmonella were reduced by more than 2.5 logs to below the
 27

detection limit. Bacteriota investigations in sponges demonstrated a trend toward

Gram-negative bacteria dominance and a transition to a high relative predominance

of Pseudomonas throughout time. The pathogens were in the minority compared to

the other bacteria, according to both agar plating and bacteriota analysis.

Consumers typically use kitchen sponges for dishwashing and scouring pans

and casseroles, but they can also be used to clean kitchen surfaces such as sinks,

refrigerators, and stovetops (Lagendijk et al., 2008). In Norway, brushes are the most

commonly used implements for manual dishwashing (Rssvoll et al., 2015). In a UK

observational study, some customers utilized more than one sort of cleaning

equipment for dishwashing, with 29%, 50%, and 77% using brushes, sponges, and

cloths, respectively (Mattick et al., 2003b). There is a scarcity of information about

brush usage in various countries.

Figure 6 Choice of cleaning utensil for washing the dishes in 10

European  countries, based on a web-based survey with 9966 respondents.
 28

Numbers shown are %  of respondents. (Original question: “Typically: How

do you wash up or clean dirty  dishes?”) 

Consumer-collected sponges can have high bacterial counts, ranging from 6–9

log CFU (Evans and Redmond, 2019; Hilton and Austin, 2000; Ikawa and Rossen,

1999; Rossi et al., 2013). In used sponges, a diverse variety of non-pathogenic and

opportunistic pathogenic bacteria, viruses, Archeae, and Eukaryota have been

discovered (Cardinale et al., 2017; Jacksch et al., 2020). Salmonella and

Campylobacter, both dangerous bacteria, have also been found (Borrusso and

Quinlan, 2017; Chaidez and Gerba, 2000; Enriquez et al., 1997a; Mattick et al.,

2003b). While sponges are used to remove food soils and reduce bacterial counts,

germs, including pathogens, may be transferred to surfaces (Biranjia-Hurdoyal and

Latouche, 2016; Mattick et al., 2003a). As a result, sponges have the potential to

serve as a reservoir for microorganisms. Because there is far less information on

kitchen brushes in the scientific literature than there is about sponges, it is unknown

to what extent they can act as disease reservoirs. Total counts in the range of 3–8 log

CFU were reported in used brushes in a research among the elderly in the United

Kingdom, and Enterobacteriaceae and Staphylococcus aureus were often detected

(Evans and Redmond, 2019).

Sponges absorb a lot of water and fluids. Sponges are frequently damp after

use, allowing germs to proliferate, but speedy drying may minimize or eliminate the

bacteria. Salmonella is known to die off in dry sponges, but it can flourish in humid

kitchen towels (Cogan et al., 2002; Mattick et al., 2003a). In the scientific literature,
 29

there is insufficient information linking sponge water intake and drying capabilities

to harmful bacteria growth and survival. Brushes are likely to absorb less water than

sponges, but further research is needed to understand how this affects bacterial

growth and survival.

Cleaning or disinfecting cleaning utensils may be a technique to manage

bacterial contamination and limit future spread in the kitchen environment, as well as

reduce waste by extending the lifetime of the utensils. There have been various

studies on sponge cleaning and disinfection (Ikawa and Rossen, 1999; Park et al.,

2006; Sharma et al., 2009), but no studies on kitchen brushes to our knowledge. The

addition of hypochlorite or dishwashing detergents to sponges has been shown to

reduce bacterial levels by 1.5–5 log CFU (Ikawa and Rossen, 1999; Nielsen et al.,

2002; Rusin et al., 1998), but some studies claim that the antibacterial effect is

thwarted by the presence of food soil (Ikawa and Rossen, 1999; Nielsen et al., 2002;

Rusin et al., 1998) (Kusumaningrum et al., 2002; Sharma et al., 2009). Sharma et al.

(2009) found that using a dishwasher or heating sponges for 1 minute in a microwave

oven lowered bacterial levels by >5 log or 6 log, respectively. Other investigations

have validated the bactericidal effect of treating sponges in the microwave oven and

dishwasher (Ikawa and Rossen, 1999; Park et al., 2006). These sponge cleaning and

disinfection investigations are primarily concerned with the killing of bacteria rather

than whether or not food dirt is removed from the sponges. If the sponge is humid,

the remaining food soil may allow surviving microorganisms to re-grow.

Three types of new, unused sponges (numbers 13, 21, 22, and 32), as well as
 30

one brush (number 32), were injected with a suspension of Salmonella,

Campylobacter, and bacteria isolated from kitchens, as well as a food soil suspension.

Individually developed bacteria were combined in equal quantities before being put

to the food soil suspension at a concentration of around 105/ml. The food soil

suspension was made from 0.1 percent poultry soil, 0.1 percent egg-based soil, and

1% lettuce soil, as previously described (Mretr et al., 2020). By immersing the

sponges and brush in the bacteria-soil suspension (5 104 CFU/ml), they were infected

and soiled. Sponges were immersed in 200 mL of bacteria-soil suspension (at room

temperature), pushed five times while immersed, squeezed once, and placed on a

steel tray. Brushes were soaked in 100 mL of bacterial-soil suspension, squeezed up

and down five times while immersed, then shaken before drying. To replicate regular

use, soil (without bacteria) was added after 3, 7, and 14 days of storage, and water

was added after 1, 2, and 6 days of storage, as indicated above. During the

experiment, the temperature and humidity in the room were recorded. After

inoculation and storage for 1, 3, and 7 days, samples for microbiological analysis

were obtained. Sponges and brushes (three of each) were transferred to bags, 50–100

ml buffered peptone water was added to each bag, and microorganisms were

suspended for 60 seconds by stomaching (sponge) or hand-massaging (brush). Spread

plating on PCA (total viable count, 30 °C, two days), XLD (Salmonella)(Oxoid), and

mCCDA were used to count bacteria (Campylobacter). Initial testing revealed that

counting Salmonella and Campylobacter was challenging due to non-pathogenic

bacteria overgrowing the plates. To deal with this, XLD (one day) and mCCDA (two
 31

days) samples were incubated at 42°C instead of 37°C. The pathogens grew at 42 °C,

according to the controls. Three technical replicates of each type of sponge and brush

were used in the experiment.

 32

Figure 7 Total numbers of bacteria (A), Salmonella (B) and

Campylobacter (C) in three types of sponges (S) and one type of brush (B)
initially and after 1, 3 and 7 days of storage.
 33

Two way sponge and brush function

The results of a survey of 9966 households revealed that cleaning methods for

dirty dishes differ significantly across European countries. Consumers prefer to use a

dishwasher, with 44 percent stating that this is their preferred option (Fig. 1).

Dishwasher usage varies with household equipment (Pearson r = 0.9): 57 percent of

households have a dishwasher, and usage prevalence varies from Norway (69 percent

typical usage for 81 percent equipped) and Germany (59 percent usage for 72 percent

equipped) on top, to the United Kingdom (31 percent usage for 47 percent equipped),

Hungary (24 percent usage, 30 percent equipped), and Romania (24 percent usage, 30

percent equipped) (lowest with 10 percent usage for 15 percent equipped). If you

don't have a dishwasher, the most common method is to wash dishes in a sink or

basin using hot water and soap with a sponge. The use of sponges was 2.5 times

higher than the use of dish brushes on average across the 10 countries (36 percent vs.

14 percent for brushes), although there were significant differences between countries

(Fig. 1). For example, sponges were used 6 times more frequently in Portugal than

brushes, whereas brushes were used 3 times more frequently in Norway. Only 8% of

households claim to use a cloth as their primary dishwashing tool, with Romania

(19%) having the highest incidence and Greece having the lowest (2 percent ).

Consumers also combine cleaning utensils, according to our findings. Thus, among

the 36 percent who mostly clean with a sponge, 26 percent also use a dishwasher, 17

percent a dish brush, and 11 percent a cloth, while among the 14 percent who

primarily clean with a brush, 38 percent also use a dishwasher, 44 percent a dish
 34

sponge, and 16 percent a cloth.

Three varieties of sponges and one type of brush were used to study the

development and survival of Campylobacter, Salmonella, and other kitchen-

associated bacteria. The items evaluated had different water uptake and drying

abilities (Fig. 2) and were given water or soil every day except after 4 and 5 days of

storage.

The type of cleaning equipment made a difference in bacterial survival and

proliferation. Brushes had the lowest bacterial counts, with a quick die-off of all

species of bacteria seen (Fig. 3). Because no residual water was detected 4.5 hours

after immersion in water, the rapid die-off correlates to the brush drying quickly (as

seen in Fig. 2). In sponges, bacteria grew rapidly at first (Fig. 3), with total bacterial

numbers reaching roughly 9 log after 1 to 3 days and remaining steady thereafter.

These levels correspond to those found in used sponges gathered from customers

(Donofrio et al., 2012; Marotta et al., 2018). Salmonella and Campylobacter levels in

sponges frequently declined over time, and pathogen levels were much lower

(0.00001–1%) than the overall number of bacteria. Salmonella growth was observed

on the first day after inoculation in sponge type S22, which dried slowly according to

the drying experiments, and Salmonella was also recognized after 7 days of storage.

After 24 hours of storage, S22 held an average of 5.6 g water (measured each day

during the experiment). The two additional sponges tested, S13 and S21, had an

average water content of 1.3 and 2.8 g, respectively. As a result, it appears that

Salmonella thrives in the most humid sponge.

 35

The producers claimed that the sponges S21 and S22 included antibacterial

ingredients (silver and quaternary ammonium compound disinfectant, respectively).

There were no growth inhibition zones for S. Infantis, S. Enteritidis, Pseudomonas

sp., or Staphylococcus sp. in agar diffusion assays using bacteria dispersed on agar or

imbedded in soft agar (Examples shown in Supplementary Fig. S5). The absorbent

mat containing zinc pyrithione had inhibition zones (approximately 2 cm) for all

microorganisms (positive control). The S22 sponge with QAC had the maximum

growth/survival of overall bacteria and Salmonella in the experiment measuring

bacteria growth/survival (Fig. 3).

It's more likely that excessive humidity and sluggish drying were more

relevant factors in bacterial growth and survival than QAC content. The growth of

total bacteria was slower and the reduction of viable Salmonella and Campylobacter

was faster in the S21 sponge containing silver than in the other sponges tested (Fig.

3), but it is difficult to say whether this was due to the presence of silver because no

inhibition was observed in the agar diffusion tests. S21 had a distinct bacteriota than

the other sponges on day seven, with no Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas

veronii completely dominating the bacteriota. There are few additional scientific

research that we are aware of that look into the antibacterial effects of sponges that

have antimicrobial chemicals added to them. In a five-day dishwashing model

research, Enriquez et al. (1997b) found that sponges containing an unknown

antimicrobial ingredient reduced the quantity of total and fecal coliform bacteria. In

one study (Nielsen et al., 2002), drops of antimicrobial dishwashing liquids (active
 36

compounds not disclosed) were added to conventional sponges, and some of the

liquids resulted in a 3–5 log reduction in total bacterial count in sponges, but no

effect on Salmonella and total bacterial count was observed in laboratory tests in the

other study (Kusumaningrum et al., 2002).

In practical experiments in kitchens where antibacterial dishwashing liquid

was given daily to sponges, no effect on overall bacterial count was seen in the latter

trial (Kusumaningrum et al., 2002). In general, antimicrobials integrated/coated on

home objects such as cutting boards, counter tops, sinks, and so on have a minimal

influence on food hygiene (Mretr and Langsrud, 2011). Even if the added molecule

possesses antibacterial characteristics in vitro, problems such as low concentration,

restricted availability, and diminishing concentration over time may arise when it is

included into a product. In practice, these characteristics, as well as neutralization in

the presence of significant organic loads, may restrict the antibacterial efficacy (Mretr

and Langsrud, 2011).

Identifying the defect of the device

Synthetic kitchen sponges are a common cleaning item for surfaces like counter

tops, cutlery, tables, and dishes. Sea sponges were employed for cleaning purposes in

ancient times before the advent of the synthetic sponge. Their permeable bodies and

soft bodies made them the ideal cleaning instrument. The Du Pont corporation, on the

other hand, developed and patented the first cellulose sponge in the 1940s, which

eventually supplanted the sea sponge in many homes throughout the twentieth

century (How Products are Made, n.d).

 37

Artificial sponges are still used to clean surfaces such as dishes, flatware,

counter tops, pots and pans in American homes and around the world today. Artificial

sponges, while easier to get by and less expensive to purchase, are not

environmentally friendly. Because cellulose, one of the primary elements in synthetic

sponges, is a raw material sourced from trees, artificial kitchen sponges contribute to

deforestation and discharge pollutants into the air throughout the production process.

Because they can be obtained ethically and are 100 percent biodegradable, using sea

sponges as a kitchen sponge is considered environmentally friendly. Natural sponges

include enzymes that suppress bacterial growth, according to a recent study, although

the mechanism of this inhibition is yet unknown (Ruocco et al., 2017). Despite the

fact that artificial kitchen sponges have been in use for decades, new research

suggests that they harbor a large number of microorganisms, some of which can

cause sickness.

Bacteria can multiply quickly in a used sponge if the conditions are right. In

most cases, the sponge's nutrients and moisture are sufficient to support the growth of

these microorganisms. Using the same unclean sponge repeatedly throughout the

'cleaning' procedure might spread bacteria from one surface to another. According to

a new German study published in the journal Scientific Reports, dangerous bacteria

can stay in a dish sponge long after it has been sterilized.

According to the International Business Times, researchers from Furtwangen

University described kitchen sponges as a "common microbial hot point." The study

involved DNA analysis of 14 kitchen sponges collected from private homes, which
 38

revealed 362 different bacteria, far more than what is generally found on a toilet.

Sponge bacteria such as salmonella, E. coli, and staphylococcus can be picked up

since they are mostly moist and built for absorption.

The majority of the bacteria discovered were not hazardous, however

pathogens that may cause diseases in people were discovered, according to the

researchers. "Kitchen sponges not only operate as a reservoir of germs, but also as

disseminators over domestic surfaces," they added. "This can lead to cross-

contamination of hands and food, which is regarded a major cause of foodborne

disease outbreaks."

Researchers also discovered that traditional cleaning procedures, such as

microwaving a sponge, only remove roughly 60% of bacteria. Because resistant

strains recolonize after washing the sponge, certain germs may even grow. To limit

the risk of bacteria, the study suggests that users replace sponges once a week.

German researchers conducted a germ-analysis of kitchen sponges in a 2017

study published in Scientific Reports, with some surprising results. They discovered

362 different types of bacteria in the pores of sponges taken from everyday homes,

with staggering numbers – up to 45 billion germs per square centimeter. "Sponges are

frequently the dirtiest object in the kitchen and the most difficult to keep clean," says

Manan Sharma, a microbiologist with the US Department of Agriculture's Food

Safety Laboratory in Beltsville, Maryland.

In a survey of U.S. homes conducted by NSF International, 77 percent of

sponges and dishcloths tested positive for coliform bacteria, 86 percent for yeast and
 39

mold, and 18 percent for Staph bacteria. NSF International is a non-profit

organization that develops water filter and other equipment safety standards.

That's why the Food Code of the Food and Drug Administration forbids

restaurants from using sponges to wash down surfaces that come into touch with

food. "A safe kitchen is a dry kitchen with no damp sponges or wet towels for germs

to thrive overnight," explains O. Peter Snyder, whose Hospitality Institute of

Technology and Management in St. Paul, Minnesota, provides training in solid food-

safety measures for the food and restaurant industries.

You can also get a sponge that isn't manufactured from paper or wood pulp,

which is what regular cellulose sponges are comprised of. Many are now made of

less porous and absorbent polymers, which are less likely to hold the moisture that

bacteria thrive. Reichert also suggests using plant-based foam sponges mixed with a

citrus cleaning solution for approximately a month to keep bacteria at bay.

Gathering feedbacks of the device to innovate it more

According to a recent study by the Good Housekeeping Institute, soaking

sponges in bleach for five minutes is the most effective technique to clean sponges.

However, mixing three-quarters of a cup of bleach in a gallon of water, as the

Institute did, may be more than most people are willing to do. Cleaning sponges in a

microwave oven or in the dishwasher with dry heating was nearly as successful as

bleach, according to the study.

Your opponent is not a kitchen sponge. However, it can be extremely filthy.

Scientists published a research this week that revealed how tightly packed
 40

microscopic bacteria are in your dirty kitchen sponge. Nonetheless, Dr. Egert noted

that, even if the bacterium isn't harmful, it's probably advisable to throw away your

sponge when it starts to stink – an indication that the nasty bacteria is present.

According to Dr. Egert, tossing implies balancing hygiene and sterility, thriftiness,

and environmental sustainability. The US Department of Agriculture also

recommends replacing sponges on a regular basis because they are "difficult to

clean."

In our original interview, Dr. Egert added, "You should not get hysterical and

terrified of your kitchen sponge today." Even sterile conditions, he added, can make a

person sick. "However, if you're already sick or have sick individuals at home, you

should take extra precautions." This takes us to the subject of risk, which the study

was not designed to evaluate.

Cross-contamination is common in kitchens, and immune systems differ.

According to many experts, you may become sick from badly prepared food or your

cellphone just as readily as you can from a dirty sponge. And, just as a pothole may

damage one car but not another, two bodies' responses to the same infection might

differ, according to Kevin Sauer of Kansas State University, who has researched

cross-contamination in the kitchen.

If you're still concerned, Solveig Langsrud, a microbiologist at Nofima, an

applied research agency in Norway, has studied how different hygiene techniques

might reduce bacterial contamination in kitchens and offers three advice. Don't put

hazardous microorganisms in your sponge.

 41

Scrub chunky food detritus or wipe off fresh meat juices, dirt from fruits and

vegetables, unpasteurized milk stuff, vomit, or your pet's droppings with your

sponge. Using a paper towel, cleaner, or running water is all that is required. Keep

sick people away from areas where food is prepared. (And, in case you're wondering,

a vegan kitchen full of fresh vegetables isn't immune, either.)

Dr. Langsrud recommends washing your sponge after each usage, which

contradicts Dr. Egert's findings. Dr. Egert, on the other hand, does not believe his

donors washed their sponges properly. Although this may not be practical for many of

us, you can disinfect your sponges and get rid of the majority of their bacteria with a

little effort.

Manan Sharma, a microbiologist with the US Department of Agriculture who

researches foodborne diseases, and his colleagues soaked sponges in ground beef at

room temperature for two days to make them especially bacteria-y, then compared

typical cleaning procedures. Microwaving and putting them through the dishwasher

were determined to be the most effective methods of killing bacteria, mold, and yeast.

There were, however, certain caveats: In the microwave, a synthetic, metallic,

or dry sponge can catch fire. Microwaves and dishwasher models differ, so keep an

eye on the temperature. Too little heat, time, or steam can cause your sponge to enter

"the danger zone," a zone where germs thrive. Make sure your sponge is damp, as

steam destroys a lot of bacteria, according to specialists.

Drying is also "a simple, affordable, environmentally friendly, and effective

approach to keep bacterial levels down," according to Dr. Langsrud. That's because,
 42

for the most part, moisture-loving bacteria can't multiply on a dry sponge, which

takes us back to Dr. Langsrud's final piece of advise and our original quandary.

Be careful not to get too attached to your sponge. Even with protection,

washing, and drying, some bacteria found in kitchens can build up in sponges,

according to Dr. Langsrud. "These bacteria can withstand drying and hide in food

detritus and a self-produced slime," she explained. "Fighting them will be

impossible."

She agrees with Dr. Egert that sponges should be disposed of at least once a

week or when they begin to smell terrible. She also recommends discarding sponges

on a regular basis if someone in your home is unwell, such as with cancer. If

necessary, re-use cleaned sponges in less hygienic areas.

Related studies

Study entitled “Dish scrubber with changeable scrub head” ( Aaron C. Krause,

Aleksadrs Titovs 2017) where in their study they made a dish scrubbing brush

includes an elongated handle and a brush head adapted to be releasably attached to

the top of the handle. A hollow reservoir located within the handle contains liquid

soap. An orifice at the top of the handle communicates with the brush head when it is

attached and a pump accessible from the exterior of the handle forces soap from the

reservoir to the brush head. The brush head includes a foam brush and an adapter for

securing the brush head to the top of the handle. wherein said top end of said handle
 43

portion includes a partial external thread and a substantially elongated linear slot and

wherein said adapter includes an elongated rib adapted to ride in said slot to prevent

rotation of said brush as a portion of said adapter is rotated.

The objective of this innovative invention is to be used in a kitchen for scrubbing

pots and pans, dishes and the like and, more particularly, toward such a scrubbing

device that has changeable scrub heads.

“Compostable and biodegradable scrubbing sponge” (Habib Rostami 2017) an

environmentally friendly fully compostable and biodegradable scrubbing sponge/pad

in the form of a new scrubbing layer of material that can be secured to an existing

liquid absorbent sponge layer of material, or alternatively, it can be formed having

only a single scrubbing layer of material without it being secured to another sponge

layer. Whichever form is used for the invention, the scrubbing layer referred to here

as “bi-component” material is made from multi-layers of biopolymer fiber materials

known by the brand names of Ecoview™ (offered by BASF™ company), or

Ecoflex™ (offered by BASF™ company), in combination with single or multi-layers

of PLA (Polylactic Acid) polymer material. The scrubbing layer may be made from

extruded sheets or from non-woven or woven methods of said bi-component

materials alone or in combination with natural fiber to form the scrubbing surface. In

accordance with the present invention, the liquid absorbent sponge layer as well as

the scrubbing layer (and any other components) used in the invention are all made
 44

from completely compostable and biodegradable materials giving the scrubbing

sponge its environmentally friendly characteristic.

“Labelled Sponges” (Barbara Isenberg 2015) The present invention involves to a

cleaning tool comprising a pad or towel with a mark designating the intended use of

the pad or towel. A cleaning kit comprises a plurality of cleaning pads or towels with

at least one face with a mark designating an intended use and includes instructions

for use of the pads, enclosed in a receptacle. 

“Integrated scraper-sponge” (Jamie kersey, Daniel Biagi 2016)

An integrated scraper-sponge includes scraper layer is fixed between the first and

second sponge and/or abrasive layers. The support structure body includes an area

configured and dimensioned to fit between at least a major portion the interface,

and/or a plurality of apertures are provided within the area of the support structure

body. The scraper layer includes an edge that can be used to remove solidified or

other contaminants.

“Sponge Scrub Brush” A sponge scrub brush comprises a laminate structure

including a sponge layer made of an elastic porous material including open cells. A

scrub body is a columnar body. The sponge layer includes: a first sponge layer

constituting a surface layer forming an upper bottom face of the columnar body; and

a second sponge layer constituting an intermediate layer interposed between a rear

face layer forming a lower bottom face of the columnar body and the first sponge
 45

layer. The second sponge layer is formed such that the number of cells which is the

number of bubbles per unit is smaller and the bubbles are coarser than the first

sponge layer.

“Scraper Sponge” (Alahandro Olatunde Omotola 2018) A scraper sponge for

cleaning and scraping away unwanted substances from an object or surface

comprising a sponge body defining a first surface, a first layer, second layer, third

layer, second surface opposite the first surface, a continuous side surface around the

perimeter; and a scraper and scraper holder secured in an aperture defining the

scraper holder approximately between the first surface and second surface of the

sponge body. The scraper, after being inserted into the scraper holder has a tip

portion extending outwardly from the scraper holder within the aperture within the

sponge body and defining at least 5 edges and a depressible surface concave female

groove to which forces are applied to manipulate the rigid scraper. The sponge body

is usable with or without the scraper and has two surfaces available for cleaning and

scouring; the first surface and second surface. The second layer, third layer, third

surface, and continuous side surface are made of the same sponge-like cellulose

material. As an alternative, the second layer, third layer, third surface, and a portion

of the continuous side surface are not made of the same material and the sponge body

has at least three surfaces adapted for cleaning and scouring; the first surface, second

surface, and a portion of the continuous side surface. The sponge body is also usable

with or without the scraper.

 46

“Scrub Gloves” (Timothy Redd 2015) A waterproof cleaning glove is provided. The

waterproof cleaning glove includes a body having a palm portion and five finger

stalls projecting therefrom. The palm portion and the five finger stalls are made of a

water-proof polymer material. The five finger stalls each having a tip portion and

base portion at a junction of the finger stall with the palm portion. A scouring pad is

affixed to the palm portion and the base portion of the each finger stall by a water-

proof adhesive. The scouring pads extend from the base portion of each of the finger

stalls to a knuckle region. Sponges are located on the tip portion of each of the finger

stalls. The sponges extend up the front side of the finger stall and over the tip portion.

Prior Art 1
 47

Inventor: Giovanni Frontera

Title: Dish Brush

Patent No. US10441131B2

Date: 2019-10-15

Description: Invented by Giovanni Frontera in 2018. A lower sponge layer provides

a soft, absorbent washing surface on the bottom surface of the sponge. An upper

abrasive layer provides a scrubbing surface on the top surface of the sponge. The

front peripheral edge of the sponge provides a scraping edge on a scraping layer,

which extends partially from the front edge toward the rear edge of the sponge,

between the sponge layer and the abrasive layer. Flexible barbs extend rearward from

the rear edge of the scraping layer, such that the barbs become embedded in the

sponge layer during the manufacturing process and firmly secure the scraping layer

to the sponge layer.

Prior art 2
 48

Inventor: Steven Park

Title: Cleaning System with Handle
Patent No. US10939793B2
Date: 2019-12-26

Description: Invented by Steven park in 2019  sanding sponge but is much more

flexible and water permeable than current sanding sponges. To this end, the hand-

held cleaning apparatus comprises open channels, or “blow holes,” that promote

water flow through the sponge and give the sponge flexibility. The size and the

number of the channels vary by the material or density of the sponge. The hand-held

cleaning apparatus, additionally, contains a handle that is removable attached, which

enables the consumer the ability to connect one or more cleaning apparatuses

together to form the desired shape and form of the cleaning apparatus.

Prior Art 3
 49

Inventors: William Harrington, James M. Buckley, Robert F. Smith, Paul Adams

Title: Cleaning devices having feedback between different cleaning states

Patent No.US10827822B2

Date: 2015-10-01

Description: Invented by William Harrington, James M. Buckley, Robert F. Smith,

and Paul Adams a surface with areas that provide different cleaning states. The areas

of different cleaning states are connected to one another by a deflection member that

provides tactile and/or audible feedback to the user when transitioning between the

different cleaning states.

Inventor: Giovanni Frontera

Title: Dish Brush
Patent No.US10441131B2

Date:2019-10-15

Inventor: William Harrington, James M.

Buckley, Robert F. Smith, Paul Adams
Title: Cleaning devices having feedback
between different cleaning states

Patent No. US10827822B2

 50

Figure 11. State-of-the-Art-Landscape

Table 1. The Technical Field of Prior Patented Technologies

Technical Field: Circumvent the messy and irritating grease: The Effectivity

of the two-way sponge

Technical (structural/concrete) Features of Titles of the Patented tools
the
Technology (invention)
 51

D1 D2 D3
A. Brush x ✓
x
B. Scrubbing Sponge ✓ ✓ x

C. Holder x x ✓

D. Detachable sponge and brush x x ✓

E. Scraper ✓ x x

Synthesis

The Sponges as shown in prior arts 1, 2, 3 are different designs by some previous

inventions (Frontera 2018, Park 2019, Harrington, Buckley, Smith, Adams 2015)

depends of the tool will accommodate, these are widely used and found effective

according to their purposes. In prior art 1 although it has a scrubbing sponge but its

not detachable and no brush in the other side of the sponge which will not clean the

hard substance that sticks to the pan, plates, forks, and other kitchen utensils that can

cause contamination and bacteria build ups in the utensils and the detachable holder

is not present. In prior arts 2 the sponge has a hole that can release more water and

easy to clean when the grease sticks to the sponges, sponges holds more water and it

can cause also some contamination because of the small residues of food that may

stuck in sponges holes and the prior arts 2 there is no detachable sponges and brush

also scraper. In prior arts 3 there is a detachable holder and detachable brush but there
 52

is no detachable scrubbing sponge and scraper, this will not clean the grease which

only removed by using scrubbing sponge which also can cause contamination if the

kitchen utensils not properly clean. The three (3) prior arts may have different

features which are also present in some innovative kitchen scrubbing sponges and

brush but all of those cannot do the task at the same task which can be a time

consuming on finding other cleaning tools especially when you wash a greasy utensil.

These important characteristics are all present in this project which is the two-way

sponge.

Further, the previous innovative dish-washing sponges and brush invented by

Frontera 2018, Park 2019, Harrington, Buckley, Smith, Adams 2015 as presented in

prior arts 1, 2, and 3 are related on the current study current study and were all

considered significant in the design and development of innovative two-way sponge

Theoretical Framework

The study Design and Development of two-way sponge will be anchored to the

following theories:

Grease: A term used to describe soft or rendered animal fat or animal fat

products such as lard or butter

 53

Sponge: is a tool or cleaning aid made of soft, porous material. Typically used for

cleaning impervious surfaces, sponges are especially good at absorbing water and

water-based solutions. Originally made from natural sea sponges, they are most

commonly made from synthetic materials today

Brush: is a common tool with bristles, wire or other filaments. It generally consists of

a handle or block to which filaments are affixed in either a parallel or perpendicular

orientation, depending on the way the brush is to be gripped during use.

Holder: A holder is a container in which you put an object, usually in order to

protect it or to keep it in place

Conceptual Framework

Below is a diagram illustrating the study's conceptual framework.will act as a guide

for the researchers during the study's execution. It is going to happen. input, process,

and output may all be broken down into three pieces. Ideas from related literature and

studies will be included in the input. documentation relating to patents, supply and
 54

materials, tools and equipment, and so on labor. Testing, modifying, and assessing

will be part of the process.

Input Process Output

Concepts and Ideas

Related Literature Testing

Functionality of
and Studies Revising
the two-way
Patent Documents Evaluating

Supplies and sponge

Materials

Tools and

Equipment

Figure 12. The Conceptual Framework of the Two-way Sponge

Operational Definition of terms

The operational key words used in the design and creation of the two-way sponge are

listed below.

Circumvent: to get around, particularly by cunning or scheme

Effectivity: power to be effective; the quality of being able to bring about an

effect
Two-way: moving or working in two opposite directions or allowing something to
move or work in two opposite directions.
Messy:
 55

Irritating:

Sponge:

Chapter III

Testing and Evaluation of the Project

This chapter, on the operational framework, presents the stages on the testing and

evaluating in the conduct of this study.

Specification of two-way sponge

Weight :

Height :
 56

Width :

Length :

Project Design Phase

The Project Design Phase shows several figures of the two-way sponge. Figure is the

isometric view of the two-way sponge. Figure shows the front view and Figure

shows the top view of the two-way sponge. Further, the Figure shows the exploded

view of the detachable holder and scraper of the two-way sponge and lastly, Figure

shows the exploded view of detachable scrubbing sponge and brush of the Two-way

sponge.
 57

Gathering all dishes that need to wash and

clean

Cleaning it first with running water

arranging it to their respective types of

kitchen utensils

Washing the kitchen utensils with sponge or

brush depends on what type of kitchen
utensil you intended to clean

Use the two-way sponge to clean the surface

Change from sponge to brush or brush to sponge

depends on what kind of unwanted residues that
sticks to the kitchen utensils after using
 58

Use the scraper to remove hard substance or

grease and use the sponge or brush to clean it
properly

After drying the utensils arrange them in

their respectively kitchen utensils storage

Figure 13. New Process flow of Safety Dishwashing

Supplies and Materials

This section shows the supplies and materials that were used in

designing the project which is the two-way sponge. Table 2 shows the list of supplies

and materials with their quantity, unit and description. These supplies and materials

like plastic holder for sponge, bristle brush, scrubbing sponge, and scrapper were

needed to make the two-way sponge.

Table 2. Supplies and Materials of Two-Way Sponge

Quantity Unit Description

1 pc. Sponge
1 pc. Brush
1 pc. Rubber
1 pc. Plastic
 59

Tools and Equipment

This section shows the tools and equipment that were used in

designing the two-way sponge. Table shows the list of tools and equipments with

their corresponding functions. Different tools and equipments used were plastic,

sponge, and bristle brush.

Table 3. List of Tools and Equipment of the Two-way Sponge.

Tools and Equipment Functions

Silicone Sealant Gun Used for sealing up the gaps of the Two-

way sponge
Hack Saw Cutting down the parts of the Two-way

Sponge to have the desired shape of the

project
Electric Drill Used to drill holes of the Two-way

sponge
Cutter Used to cut the small areas of the Two-

Way sponge
Steel Tape Measuring tool and ruling straight
 60

lines of the Two-Way Sponge.

Angular Scale Measuring tool for angles of the
Two-Way Sponge

Development Phase

This section shows the construction, assembly, construction time

frame, and costing.

Construction Time Frame

This section shows the construction time frame of the developmental study.

Table below shows the time frame in constructing the project. The

development to revision of malfunctioning parts shows the time frame that

will take one to two months. The testing of the functionality of the project

will be done in the third week of November 2021. Pilot testing will be done

from second week up to fourth week of January 2022.

Table 4. Construction Time Frame of Two-Way Sponge

 61

November
November January
January
2021
2021 2022
2022

Tasks
Task

Weeks Weeks

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Designing and
Constructing of two-
way sponge

Revising of defective
parts of the two-way
sponge.

Project cost

In this section shows the total cost of the proposed project including the supplies

and materials.

Table 5 shows the cost for the supplies and materials that will be use in

conducting the study.

Table 6 shows the cost of the project with the total cost of supplies materials and

for the labor large as the total projects cost of the proposed technology.

Table 5: Cost of Supplies and Materials of Two-Way Sponge

Quantity Unit Description Unit Cost
1 pc. Food GradePlastic
1 pc. Sponge
 62

1 pc. Brush
1 pc. Rubber

Table 6: Project Cost of Two-Way Sponge

Description Cost (Php)
Supplies and Materials
Labor

Evaluation Phase

This section shows the research design, research instrument, evaluators to be

involved, data-gathering procedure/evaluation of the developed project, statistical

treatment and analysis of data gathered.

Research Method

The project study will utilized the descriptive-developmental method. Gillaco

(2014), expressed that descriptive method seeks the real facts from a current

situation. Additionally, this method in research mainly works on the

description, comparison, analysis and interpretation of the existing data.

Since the present study seeks to gather factual information which will be

helpful on designing an appropriate tool or device that will assist in

administering teaching and learning as well as a convenient multifunctional

tool for the benefits of many people, this method in research will be useful.

Meanwhile, developmental research is discussed as the research projects that

require the creation of information with the goal of enhancing instructional

 63

design, implementation, and assessment processes. This type of study is

focus on either situation-specific problem solving or broad inquiry procedures

(Richey, et al., 2004). In its most basic form, developmental research can be

described as the

investigation of the method and effects of a particular instructional design

and development efforts; or a circumstance in which someone is conducting

instructional design, development, or evaluation activities while also studying

the process (Richey & Klein, 2007). In other words, descriptive

developmental method is a systematic study of putting into design,

development, and careful evaluation of instructional systems, 44 procedures,

and items that must meet the norm or requirements. Thus, the adaptation of

the two-way sponge will fit to use the developmental research method in

order to focus on innovative design, development and evaluation which will

impact on teaching and learning, and convenient use of many people.

Research Instrument

Questionnaires, interviews, demonstrations on how to use the two-way sponge,

and observations were utilized to collect and analyze data, as well as document any

procedures, over the course of this research study. An instrument to be measured on a

rating scale was employed to gather information on the project's functionality in

terms of performance.
 64

Rating Scale: Descriptive Rating Interpretation

5 (4.50-5.0) Highly Functional If the statement is true

81-100% of the time

4 (3.50-4.99) Functional If the statement is true

61-80% of the time

3 (2.50-3.99) Moderately Functional If the statement is true

41-60% of the time

2 (1.50-2.99) Slightly Functional If the statement is true

21-4-% of the time

1 (1.00-1.99) Not Functional If statement is true

1-20% of the time

The survey questionnaires used also the following rating scale in

terms of measuring the efficiency of the two-way brush:

Numerical rating Descriptive rating Interpretation

5 Strongly agree If the statement is true

81-100% of the time

4 agree If the statement is true

61-80% of the time

3 Neither agree or disagree If the statement is true

41-60% of the time

2 disagree If the statement is true

21-40% of the time

1 Strongly disagree If the statement is true

1-20% of the time

Research Locale
 65

This study will be conducted in the City of Digos, Davao del Sur, Region XI,
Southern part of the Philippines.

Data Gathering Procedure / Evaluation of the Project

The information will be gathered by responses to Survey Questionnaires about the

implications of the designed Two-way sponge. Furthermore, the researcher will do a

test to determine whether the project is functional or not.

Evaluators

This study will be evaluated by the following: (a) five (5) Eatery establishments; (b)

five (5) TLE/TVE Teachers; five (5) Davao del Sur State College TLE students and

(c) five (5) household members. Further, these fifteen (15) evaluators of the project

were responsible for the rating of the project.

 66

Statistical Treatment and Analysis of Data

In the treatment of data, the study will use the mean or average will be implied in this

project study. In this project, the mean or average will used. The mean or average

will be utilized in the study to determine whether the project is more useful than the

standard Dish-washing sponge design as evaluated by the consumers. The project's

time efficiency will be also tested through trials and testing. The data will be put

through an Independent Sample T-test to see if there is a significant difference in

time efficiency between the two methods of two-way sponge and normal scrubbing

sponge.

LITERATURE CITED

Adiga, I., Shobha, K.L., Mustaffa, M.B., Bismi, N.H.B., Yusof, N.H.B., Ibrahim,
N.L.M.B. and Nor, N.B.M., 2012. Bacterial contamination in the
kitchen: could it be pathogenic?.

ALwakeel, S.S., 2007. Bacterial and Aspergillus spp. contamination of

domestic kitchens in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Saudi J Biol Sci, 14, pp.1-6.

Ammann, J., Siegrist, M., & Hartmann, C., 2019. The influence of disgust
sensitivity on self-reported food hygiene behaviour. Food Control, 102,
131-138.
 67

Amir, A., McDonald, D., Navas-Molina, J. A., Kopylova, E., Morton, J. T., Zech
Xu, Z., ... & Knight, R., 2017. Deblur rapidly resolves single-nucleotide
community sequence patterns. MSystems, 2(2), e00191-16.

Apprill, A., McNally, S., Parsons, R., & Weber, L., 2015. Minor revision to V4
region SSU rRNA 806R gene primer greatly increases detection of
SAR11 bacterioplankton. Aquatic Microbial Ecology, 75(2), 129-137.

Beumer, R.R. and Kusumaningrum, H., 2003. Kitchen hygiene in daily life.
International biodeterioration & biodegradation, 51(4), pp.299-302.

Biranjia-Hurdoyal, S., & Latouche, M. C. 2016. Factors affecting microbial

load and profile of potential pathogens and food spoilage bacteria
from household kitchen tables. Canadian Journal of Infectious
Diseases and Medical Microbiology, 2016.

Borrusso, P. A., & Quinlan, J. J. 2017. Prevalence of pathogens and indicator

organisms in home kitchens and correlation with unsafe food handling
practices and conditions. Journal of food protection, 80(4), 590-597.

Burgess, C. M., Gianotti, A., Gruzdev, N., Holah, J., Knøchel, S., Lehner, A., &
Tresse, O., 2016. The response of foodborne pathogens to osmotic
and desiccation stresses in the food chain. International Journal of
Food Microbiology, 221, 37-53.

Cardinale, M., Kaiser, D., Lueders, T., Schnell, S. and Egert, M., 2017.
Microbiome analysis and confocal microscopy of used kitchen sponges
reveal massive colonization by Acinetobacter, Moraxella and
Chryseobacterium species. Scientific reports, 7(1), pp.1-13.

Chaidez, C. and Gerba, C.P., 2000. Bacteriological analysis of cellulose

sponges and loofahs in domestic kitchens from a developing country.
Dairy, Food and Environmental Sanitation, 20(11), pp.834-837.

Cogan, T.A., Slader, J., Bloomfield, S.F. and Humphrey, T.J., 2002. Achieving
hygiene in the domestic kitchen: the effectiveness of commonly used
cleaning procedures. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 92(5), pp.885-
892.

Donofrio, R.S., Bechanko, R., Hitt, N., O’Malley, K., Charnauski, T.,
Bestervelt, L.L., Saha, R. and Saha, N., 2012. Are we aware of
microbial hotspots in our household?. Journal of environmental health,
75(2), pp.12-19.
 68

Eliandra Mirlei, R., Diane, S., Williani Fabíola, G. and Eduardo Cesar, T.,
2012. Microbiological contamination and disinfection procedures of
kitchen sponges used in food services. Food and Nutrition Sciences,
2012.

Enriquez, C.E., 1997. Bacteriological survey of used cellulose sponges and

cotton dishcloths from domestic kitchens. Dairy Food Environ. Sanitat.,
17, pp.20-24.

European Food Safety Authority, 2011. Analysis of the baseline survey on the
prevalence of Campylobacter in broiler batches and of Campylobacter
and Salmonella on broiler carcasses, in the EU, 2008‐Part B: Analysis
of factors associated with Salmonella contamination of broiler
carcasses. EFSA Journal, 9(2), p.2017.

Enriquez, C.E., Enriquez, V.E. and Gerba, C.P., 1997. Reduction of bacterial
contamination in the household kitchen environment through the use
of self-disinfecting sponges. Dairy, food and environmental sanitation,
17(9), pp.550-554.

Erdoğrul, Ö. and Erbilir, F., 2005. Microorganisms in kitchen sponges.

Internet Journal of food safety, 6, pp.17-22.

Hilton, A.C. and Austin, E., 2000. The kitchen dishcloth as a source of and
vehicle for foodborne pathogens in a domestic setting. International
Journal of Environmental Health Research, 10(3), pp.257-261.

Ikawa, J.Y. and Rossen, J.S., 1999. Reducing Bacteria in Household Sponges.
Journal of Environmental Health, 62(1).

Jacksch, S., Thota, J., Shetty, S., Smidt, H., Schnell, S. and Egert, M., 2020.
Metagenomic analysis of regularly microwave-treated and untreated
domestic kitchen sponges. Microorganisms, 8(5), p.736.

Josephson, K.L., Rubino, J.R. and Pepper, I.L., 1997. Characterization and
quantification of bacterial pathogens and indicator organisms
inhousehold kitchens with and without the use of a disinfectant
cleaner. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 83(6), pp.737-750.

Kusumaningrum, H.D., Van Putten, M.M., Rombouts, F.M. and Beumer, R.R.,
2002. Effects of antibacterial dishwashing liquid on foodborne
 69

pathogens and competitive microorganisms in kitchen sponges.

Journal of food protection, 65(1), pp.61-65.

Lazou, T., Georgiadis, M., Pentieva, K., McKevitt, A. and Iossifidou, E., 2012.
Food safety knowledge and food-handling practices of Greek university
students: A questionnaire-based survey. Food Control, 28(2), pp.400-
411.

Margas, E., Meneses, N., Conde-Petit, B., Dodd, C.E. and Holah, J., 2014.
Survival and death kinetics of Salmonella strains at low relative
humidity, attached to stainless steel surfaces. International journal of
food microbiology, 187, pp.33-40.

Margas, E., Meneses, N., Conde-Petit, B., Dodd, C.E. and Holah, J., 2014.
Survival and death kinetics of Salmonella strains at low relative
humidity, attached to stainless steel surfaces. International journal of
food microbiology, 187, pp.33-40.

Marotta, S.M., Giarratana, F., Calvagna, A., Ziino, G., Giuffrida, A. and
Panebianco, A., 2018. Study on microbial communities in domestic
kitchen sponges: Evidence of Cronobacter sakazakii and Extended
Spectrum Beta Lactamase (ESBL) producing bacteria. Italian journal of
food safety, 7(4).

Mattick, K., Durham, K., Domingue, G., Jørgensen, F., Sen, M., Schaffner,
D.W. and Humphrey, T., 2003. The survival of foodborne pathogens
during domestic washing-up and subsequent transfer onto washing-up
sponges, kitchen surfaces and food. International journal of food
microbiology, 85(3), pp.213-226.

Moawad, A.A., Hotzel, H., Neubauer, H., Ehricht, R., Monecke, S., Tomaso,
H., Hafez, H.M., Roesler, U. and El-Adawy, H., 2018. Antimicrobial
resistance in Enterobacteriaceae from healthy broilers in Egypt:
emergence of colistin-resistant and extended-spectrum β-lactamase-
producing Escherichia coli. Gut pathogens, 10(1), pp.1-12.

Møretrø, T. and Langsrud, S., 2011. Effects of materials containing

antimicrobial compounds on food hygiene. Journal of food protection,
74(7), pp.1200-1211.

Nielsen, P., Brumbaugh, E. and Kananen, L., 2002. Evaluation of the use of
liquid dishwashing compounds to control bacteria in kitchen sponges.
Journal of AOAC International, 85(1), pp.107-112.
 70

Obi, C.N. and Ndukwu, C.C., 2016. Microbiological Examination of Household

Kitchen Sponges from Three Communities in Ikwuano LG A, Umuahia,
Abia State Nigeria. Microbiology Research Journal International, pp.1-
9.

Osaili, T.M., Obaid, R.S., Alowais, K., Almahmood, R., Almansoori, M.,
Alayadhi, N., Alowais, N., Waheed, K., Dhanasekaran, D.K., Al-Nabulsi,
A.A. and Ayyash, M., 2020. Microbiological quality of kitchens sponges
used in university student dormitories. BMC public health, 20(1), pp.1-
9.

Rossi, E.M., Scapin, D. and Tondo, E.C., 2013. Survival and transfer of
microorganisms from kitchen sponges to surfaces of stainless steel
and polyethylene. The Journal of Infection in Developing Countries,
7(03), pp.229-234.

Røssvoll, E., Langsrud, S., Bloomfield, S., Moen, B., Heir, E. and Møretrø, T.,
2015. The effects of different hygiene procedures in reducing bacterial
contamination in a model domestic kitchen. Journal of applied
microbiology, 119(2), pp.582-593.

Sharma, M., Eastridge, J. and Mudd, C., 2009. Effective household

disinfection methods of kitchen sponges. Food Control, 20(3), pp.310-
313.

Skuland, S.E., 2020. European food safety: Mapping critical food practices
and cultural differences in France, Norway, Portugal, Romania and the
UK.

Speirs, J.P., Anderton, A. and Anderson, J.G., 1995. A study of the microbial
content of the domestic kitchen. International Journal of
Environmental Health Research, 5(2), pp.109-122.

Trond, M., Birgitte, M., Valerie A., Paula, T., Vania, F., Anette, A., Charlotte,
N., Solveig, L., 2021. Dishwashing sponges and brushes: Consumer
practices and bacterial growth and survival.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2020.108928
71
 72

APPENDICES
 73

Appendix A

Prior Art D1, D2, D3

Prior Art 1

Inventor: Giovanni Frontera

Title: Dish Brush

Patent No. US10441131B2

Date: 2019-10-15

Description: Invented by Giovanni Frontera in 2018. A lower sponge layer provides

a soft, absorbent washing surface on the bottom surface of the sponge. An upper

abrasive layer provides a scrubbing surface on the top surface of the sponge. The

front peripheral edge of the sponge provides a scraping edge on a scraping layer,

which extends partially from the front edge toward the rear edge of the sponge,

between the sponge layer and the abrasive layer. Flexible barbs extend rearward from

the rear edge of the scraping layer, such that the barbs become embedded in the
 74

sponge layer during the manufacturing process and firmly secure the scraping layer

to the sponge layer.

Prior art 2

Inventor: Steven Park

Title: Cleaning System with Handle
Patent No. US10939793B2
Date: 2019-12-26

Description: Invented by Steven park in 2019  sanding sponge but is much more

flexible and water permeable than current sanding sponges. To this end, the hand-

held cleaning apparatus comprises open channels, or “blow holes,” that promote

water flow through the sponge and give the sponge flexibility. The size and the

number of the channels vary by the material or density of the sponge. The hand-held

cleaning apparatus, additionally, contains a handle that is removable attached, which

enables the consumer the ability to connect one or more cleaning apparatuses

together to form the desired shape and form of the cleaning apparatus.
 75

Prior Art 3

Inventors: William Harrington, James M. Buckley, Robert F. Smith, Paul Adams

Title: Cleaning devices having feedback between different cleaning states

Patent No.US10827822B2

Date: 2015-10-01

Description: Invented by William Harrington, James M. Buckley, Robert F. Smith,

and Paul Adams a surface with areas that provide different cleaning states. The areas

of different cleaning states are connected to one another by a deflection member that

provides tactile and/or audible feedback to the user when transitioning between the

different cleaning states.

APPENDIX B

Letter to the Instrument Validators

November 2021

___________________________
 76

___________________________

___________________________

Dear Validator,

Greetings!

The undersigned is currently enrolled at the Davao del Sur State College
Matti, Digos City, Davao del Sur, taking up the Bachelor of Technology and
Livelihood Education. He is currently conducting their study entitled,
“Circumvent the Irritating Grease: The Effectivity of the Two-Way Sponge ”
which aims to develop a cleaning tool that can help clean the dishes and give
a hassle free washing from unwanted residues.
In line with this, he is requesting your presence on November 25,
2021 at Davao del Sur State College to validate the questionnaire of the
study. Rest assured that all your answers will dealt with outermost
confidentiality.
The time you will spare with her would be a great contribution in the
fulfillment of the study.
Your presence is highly solicited and appreciated.

Respectfully yours,
POCHOLO JAKE M. PROCORATO
Researcher

APPENDIX C
Questionnaire Validation Sheet

Circumvent the Irritating and Messy Grease: The Effectivity of the Two-Way
Sponge.

Name of Validator: _________________________________________

 77

Highest Degree: ___________________________________________

Position: _________________________________________________

5 - Excellent 4 - Very Good 3 - Good 2 - Fair 1 - Poor

Direction: Please rate the attached questionnaires by Scale
checking the appropriate box, guided by
the following scale:

Contents
1. Clarity and Direction of Items

The vocabulary level, language structure and conceptual

level of the questionnaires suit the level of respondents.
The text directions and items were written in a clear and
understandable manner.

2. Presentation/Organization of the Items

The items presented are organized in logical manner.

3. Suitability of items

The items appropriately represent the substance of the

research adequacy. The questions are designed to
determine the conditions, knowledge, perceptions and
attitudes that are supposed to be measured.

4. Adequacy of items per category

The items represent the coverage of the research

adequacy. The number of questions per category
adequately represents the questions needed for the
research.

5. Attainment of Purpose

The instrument as a whole fulfills the objectives for which

it is constructed.

6. Objectivity

Each item question requires only one specific answer or

measures only one behavior and no aspect of the
questionnaire suggests bias.
 78

7. Scale and evaluation rating system

The scale adapted is appropriate for each of the items

stated in the questionnaires.

Comment/s:

___________________

Signature

APPENDIX D

Evaluation Sheet

Direction: Please provide the necessary information based on your

perception of the Two-Way Sponge. All information obtained by the
researcher will be treated with outmost confidentiality.

Name: (Optional) ___________________________________________

A. Users Profile

DSSC Teachers Rank : _____________________________

DSSC Student Year Level : _____________________________

For Household Members : _____________________________

B. Please rate the Two-Way Sponge in terms on Performance after the

demonstration by checking the appropriate box, guided by the following
scale:

Numerical Rating Descriptive Rating

 79

5 Highly Functional

4 Functional

3 Moderately Functional

2 Slightly Functional

1 Not Functional

Efficiency

Scale
Item
5 4 3 2 1

1. The Two-Way Sponge is not heavy in hands.

2. The Two-Way Sponge Cleans different surfaces of the

kitchen utensils.

3. The Two-Way Sponge gives strong quality of when

washing.

4. The Two-Way Sponge is convenient to use.

5. The use of Two-Way Sponge cleans the grease and

other residues of dishes.

6. The used of Two-Way Sponge lessen the time-

consuming in washing the dishes.

7. The process of washing is not messy and irritating.

8. The Two-Way Sponge is easy to bring anytime and

anywhere.

APPENDIX E
 80

Letter of Permission

Institute of Teaching Education Arts and Sciences

Education Department

Date: November 18, 2021

Dr. Augie E. Fuentes

College President
Davao del Sur State College

Dear Ma’am,

Greetings of peace and solidarity!

The undersigned is currently enrolled at the Davao del Sur College Matti,
Digos City, Davao del Sur, taking up Bachelor of Technology and Livelihood
Education major in Home Economics. She is currently conducting her
undergraduate thesis entitled; “Circumvent the Messy and irritating
Grease: The Effectivity og the Two-Way Sponge” which aims to
emphasize the hygiene ettiquette, avoiding bacterias, and time-consuming
during washing that is multifunctional.
In line with this, I, the researcher is asking from your good office to allow
me to conduct the study. Rest assured that the results therein of the study
will be available to your office and treated in accordance of the academic
practices.

I am looking forward that this request merits your positive response for it
is my gratitude and honor.

Thank you and more prosperity to your administration.

Respectfully yours,

POCHOLO JAKE M. PROCORATO

Researcher

Noted by: Approved by:

 81

ARIEL A. BALIO JR. DR. AUGIE E. FUENTES

Thesis Adviser College President

CURRICULUM VITAE

Name : Pocholo Jake M. Procorato

 82

Nickname : Pj
Address: Sinawilan Matanao, Davao del Sur
Date of Birth : April 1, 2000
Place of Birth : Digos City, Davao del Sur
Sex : Male
Height : 5’2
Weight : 51kg.
Religion: Roman Catholic
Nationality : Filipino
Father’s Name : Danilo B. Procorato
Religion: Roman Catholic
Nationality : Filipino
Mother’s Name :Robelyn M. Procorato
Religion: Roman Catholic
Nationality : Filipino

Educational Background

Tertiary: Davao del Sur State College

Course : Bachelor of Technology and Livelihood Education
Major in Home Economics

Senior High School : Mary Mediatrix of All Graces Academy Incorporated

Strand : TVL SMAW NcII
Year Graduated : 2019

Junior High School : Sinawiln National High School

Program : Special Program in ICT
Year Graduated : 2017

Elementary : Sinawilan Elementary School

Year Graduated : 2012

Training Attended

NC2 Bread and Pastry Production

NC2 Shielded Metal Arc Welding

Webinars Attended

Clothing Selection
October 2021
 83

Facilitating Centered-Learning Principle

November 2021