暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: To investigate safety issues associated with the reuse of sterilized endotracheal tubes (ETTs).
METHODS: Prospective, randomized study.
METHODS: Laboratory in vivo testing.
METHODS: Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were inoculated onto ETT cuffs. Following inoculation, ETTs were sterilized with either ethylene oxide or glutaraldehyde. Cuffs were then swabbed and cultured for 24 hours. To examine changes in the physical integrities of sterilized ETT cuffs, ETTs were sterilized with ethylene oxide gas once, twice, or three times (the E1, E2, and E3 groups, respectively). Alternatively, ETTs were soaked in glutaraldehyde for 150, 300, 450, or 600 minutes (the G1, G2, G3, and G4 groups, respectively).
METHODS: Endotracheal tube cuffs were considered nonsterile if a visible colony of test organisms was cultured, and sterile if no colony was cultured. Changes in the physical integrity of sterilized ETT cuffs were determined by measuring changes in intracuff pressure or tensile strength.
RESULTS: No growth of bacteria was observed in sterilized tubes. Endotracheal tube cuffs of the E1 and E2 groups showed almost the same physical integrity as those of the control group, whereas E3 group cuffs were softer than those of the untreated controls. Endotracheal tube cuffs of the G1 and G2 groups were harder than untreated controls; than of those of the G3 and G4 groups were similar to the controls.
CONCLUSIONS: Endotracheal tubes can be reused sterilized safely. The physical integrity of ETT cuffs may be compromised by glutaraldehyde or ethylene oxide sterilization treatments.

暂无摘要。

Glutaraldehyde, 0.2% peracetic acid, 7.5% hydrogen peroxide, 0.08% peracetic acid/1% hydrogen peroxide, and 0.55% ortho-phthalaldehyde are cleared by the FDA for reprocessing flexible gastrointestinal endoscopes. Each product has advantages and disadvantages. All require adherence to published reprocessing protocols in order to maintain the integrity of equipment while providing the public with endoscopic instruments that are safe and effective. All chemicals must be handled with respect. Selection of a product must be weighed against the needs of a particular setting, taking into consideration factors such as compatibility, toxicity, environmental controls and cost.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: For a germicide to obtain a high level disinfection (HLD) claim, FDA requires demonstration of a 6-log reduction of mycobacterial inoculum under worst case conditions. The purpose of this study was to assess the adequacy of current guidelines for high level disinfection of GI endoscopes using alkaline glutaraldehyde in simulated-use testing.
METHODS: Various gastrointestinal endoscopes were contaminated with Mycobacterium chelonae in 46 experiments. Quantitative cultures were obtained from each endoscope channel separately after each step: inoculation, standardized manual cleaning, immersion in 2% glutaraldehyde (Cidex) for 10, 20, or 45 min at room temperature, 70% isopropanol rinse, and drying.
RESULTS: Manual cleaning alone achieved a 4-log reduction. After 10 min of glutaraldehyde exposure, but before alcohol rinse, two of 10 experiments failed to achieve a 6-log reduction. However, after alcohol rinse, all 10 experiments achieved HLD. After 20 min of glutaraldehyde exposure, but before alcohol rinse, one of 18 experiments failed to achieve a 6-log reduction. After alcohol rinse, all 18 experiments achieved HLD. After 45 min of glutaraldehyde exposure, but before alcohol rinse, one of 18 experiments failed to achieve a 6-log reduction. After alcohol rinse, all 18 experiments achieved HLD. Thus, if the entire reprocessing protocol including manual cleaning, glutaraldehyde exposure, alcohol rinse, and drying was taken into account, the required 6-log reduction of mycobacteria was achieved with a minimum of 10 min of glutaraldehyde exposure at room temperature.
CONCLUSIONS: Current guidelines for high level disinfection using glutaraldehyde are appropriate. Alcohol rinse is a valuable adjunctive step for drying and for its bactericidal effects.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Both patient and staff safety are of major importance during the procedure of fibreoptic bronchoscopy. Patient safety depends partly on adequate disinfection of instruments and accessories used as well as careful monitoring during the procedure. Adequate facilities, manpower and training are also essential. Staff safety depends partly on adequate procedures to minimise any risks of sensitisation to agents such as glutaraldehyde. An audit was carried out of bronchoscopy procedures in hospitals in the UK and the findings were compared with published guidelines on good practice and clinical consensus.
METHODS: A postal questionnaire was sent to 218 bronchoscopy units in the UK. Findings were then compared with published evidence of good practice in the areas of disinfection, including the use of glutaraldehyde, patient monitoring, manpower, facilities, and training.
RESULTS: A 73% response rate was obtained. Recommended minimum disinfection times before and after routine bronchoscopies were not achieved by 35% of units. No disinfection was carried out in 34% of units before emergency bronchoscopies and in 19% of units after suspected cases of tuberculosis. Adequate rinsing of the bronchoscope with sterile or filtered water was not carried out by 43% of units. Contrary to recommendations, 31% of departments were still using glutaraldehyde in the patient examination room and inadequate room ventilation was common. Protective clothing was often not worn by staff during bronchoscopy. Inadequate intravenous access and use of supplementary oxygen were found in many units. Practice standards were higher in departments where dedicated bronchoscopy/endoscopy units of the hospital were used, and also where staff had been on external training courses.
CONCLUSIONS: This audit has shown that many units do not adhere to guidelines on disinfection procedures and patient monitoring. Unnecessary potential risks due to staff exposure to glutaraldehyde were apparent. National guidelines on good practice are not being followed in areas which may potentially affect patient and staff safety.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。