Sampling methods for flexible endoscopes without a working channel: a scoping review.

IF 3 4区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Yana Halmans, David Wellenstein, Joost Hopman, Robert Takes, Guido van den Broek
{"title":"Sampling methods for flexible endoscopes without a working channel: a scoping review.","authors":"Yana Halmans, David Wellenstein, Joost Hopman, Robert Takes, Guido van den Broek","doi":"10.1017/ice.2025.56","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A diagnostic flexible laryngoscopy using a flexible endoscope (FE) without a working channel can become contaminated when inserted through the nose to inspect the throat. Microbiological surveillance is necessary to ensure adequate reprocessing. A lack of knowledge exists about the most accurate way to assess microbiological contamination on the surface of FEs without a working channel. A scoping review of research on sampling techniques for FEs without a working channel was done to identify frequently used sampling techniques and to determine the best way to assess microbiological contamination.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL databases were searched. Data related to the sampling technique and bacterial contamination were extracted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve of the 378 studies met the inclusion criteria. None compared sampling techniques, most studies investigated the efficacy of several disinfection methods. Retrieved sampling techniques were immersion, swabbing, and wiping. Immersion and wiping could detect bacterial contamination on contaminated FEs without a working channel. Two out of six studies using a swabbing method found bacterial contamination on contaminated FEs without a working channel. Three studies using the swabbing method detected bacterial contamination after disinfection. One study did not retrieve microorganisms after disinfection using the swabbing method.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Three different sampling techniques were extracted: immersion, wiping, and swabbing, which could all detect microbiological contamination on contaminated FEs without a working channel. However, this scoping review identified significant gaps in literature. Additional research is needed to determine the best sampling technique(s) for FEs without a working channel to detect microbiological contamination.</p>","PeriodicalId":13663,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12169950/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2025.56","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: A diagnostic flexible laryngoscopy using a flexible endoscope (FE) without a working channel can become contaminated when inserted through the nose to inspect the throat. Microbiological surveillance is necessary to ensure adequate reprocessing. A lack of knowledge exists about the most accurate way to assess microbiological contamination on the surface of FEs without a working channel. A scoping review of research on sampling techniques for FEs without a working channel was done to identify frequently used sampling techniques and to determine the best way to assess microbiological contamination.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL databases were searched. Data related to the sampling technique and bacterial contamination were extracted.

Results: Twelve of the 378 studies met the inclusion criteria. None compared sampling techniques, most studies investigated the efficacy of several disinfection methods. Retrieved sampling techniques were immersion, swabbing, and wiping. Immersion and wiping could detect bacterial contamination on contaminated FEs without a working channel. Two out of six studies using a swabbing method found bacterial contamination on contaminated FEs without a working channel. Three studies using the swabbing method detected bacterial contamination after disinfection. One study did not retrieve microorganisms after disinfection using the swabbing method.

Conclusions: Three different sampling techniques were extracted: immersion, wiping, and swabbing, which could all detect microbiological contamination on contaminated FEs without a working channel. However, this scoping review identified significant gaps in literature. Additional research is needed to determine the best sampling technique(s) for FEs without a working channel to detect microbiological contamination.

无工作通道的柔性内窥镜的取样方法:范围审查。
背景:使用没有工作通道的柔性内窥镜(FE)的诊断性柔性喉镜在插入鼻子检查喉咙时可能会被污染。微生物监测是必要的,以确保充分的再处理。缺乏关于在没有工作通道的情况下评估FEs表面微生物污染的最准确方法的知识。对无工作通道的fe取样技术研究进行了范围审查,以确定常用的取样技术,并确定评估微生物污染的最佳方法。方法:检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library和CINAHL数据库。提取与采样技术和细菌污染有关的数据。结果:378项研究中有12项符合纳入标准。没有比较采样技术,大多数研究调查了几种消毒方法的效果。回收的采样技术为浸泡、拭子和擦拭。在没有工作通道的情况下,浸泡和擦拭可以检测到被污染的FEs上的细菌污染。在六项使用拭子法的研究中,有两项在没有工作通道的受污染的FEs上发现了细菌污染。三项研究采用拭子法检测消毒后的细菌污染。一项研究使用拭子法消毒后未回收微生物。结论:在无工作通道的情况下,采用浸渍、擦拭和拭子三种不同的取样技术均可检测出污染的fe上的微生物污染。然而,这一范围审查发现了文献中的重大空白。需要进一步的研究来确定没有工作通道的FEs的最佳采样技术,以检测微生物污染。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
289
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology provides original, peer-reviewed scientific articles for anyone involved with an infection control or epidemiology program in a hospital or healthcare facility. Written by infection control practitioners and epidemiologists and guided by an editorial board composed of the nation''s leaders in the field, ICHE provides a critical forum for this vital information.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信