Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2024
A multicenter study comparing the bacterial reduction on flexible endoscopes without a working channel between UV-C light disinfection versus standard endoscope Washer Disinfection: a randomized controlled trial.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Halmans Yana, Wellenstein D J, Romijn M, van Bemmel A J M, van den Berge H, Scheeren R A, Kalpoe J S, Klont R, van Zeijl J H, Sikkema H, Euser S M, Hopman J, Takes R P, van den Broek G B
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To prevent cross-contamination between patients, adequate reprocessing is necessary when using flexible endoscopes (FEs) without a working channel. The current reprocessing process using an Endoscope Washer Disinfector (EWD) is time-consuming. Ultraviolet light group C (UV-C) exposition is an alternative and fast disinfection method and has previously been shown to adequately reduce Colony Forming Units (CFUs) on FEs without a working channel. The objective of this study was to examine whether UV-C light is as effective in reducing CFUs on contaminated FEs without a working channel compared to the EWD.
METHODS: FEs without a working channel were collected in three different Otorhinolaryngology Departments in the Netherlands. After pharyngolaryngoscopy, a manual pre-cleaning with tap water was performed and a culture was collected by rolling the distal 8-10 cm of the FE over an agar plate. Next, the FE was randomly assigned to be disinfected with UV-C light (D60) or the EWD (gold standard). After disinfection, another culture was taken. The primary outcome was microbiological contamination, defined by Colony Forming Units (CFU).
RESULTS: 600 FEs without a working channel were randomized. After clinical use and manual pre-cleaning, 239/300 (79.7%) FEs in the UV-C group and 262/300 (87.3%) FEs in the EWD group were contaminated (i.e., > 0 CFU). FEs without culture confirmed contamination were excluded from further analysis. After UV-C light disinfection, 195/239 (81.6%) FEs showed 0 CFUs, compared to 187/262 (71.4%) FEs disinfected with the EWD (p < 0.01). A multivariate logistics regression analysis showed an increased odds of 0 CFUs when using UV-C light (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.19-2.79; p < 0.01), conditional on participating hospitals and types of FE.
CONCLUSIONS: UV-C light disinfection of FEs without a working channel appears more effective in reducing CFUs compared to the EWD and might be a good alternative disinfection method.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.
METHODS: FEs without a working channel were collected in three different Otorhinolaryngology Departments in the Netherlands. After pharyngolaryngoscopy, a manual pre-cleaning with tap water was performed and a culture was collected by rolling the distal 8-10 cm of the FE over an agar plate. Next, the FE was randomly assigned to be disinfected with UV-C light (D60) or the EWD (gold standard). After disinfection, another culture was taken. The primary outcome was microbiological contamination, defined by Colony Forming Units (CFU).
RESULTS: 600 FEs without a working channel were randomized. After clinical use and manual pre-cleaning, 239/300 (79.7%) FEs in the UV-C group and 262/300 (87.3%) FEs in the EWD group were contaminated (i.e., > 0 CFU). FEs without culture confirmed contamination were excluded from further analysis. After UV-C light disinfection, 195/239 (81.6%) FEs showed 0 CFUs, compared to 187/262 (71.4%) FEs disinfected with the EWD (p < 0.01). A multivariate logistics regression analysis showed an increased odds of 0 CFUs when using UV-C light (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.19-2.79; p < 0.01), conditional on participating hospitals and types of FE.
CONCLUSIONS: UV-C light disinfection of FEs without a working channel appears more effective in reducing CFUs compared to the EWD and might be a good alternative disinfection method.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.