Microbiological safety and cost-effectiveness of weekly breathing circuit changes in combination with heat moisture exchange filters: a prospective longitudinal clinical survey.

GMS Krankenhaushygiene interdisziplinar Pub Date : 2011-01-01 Epub Date: 2011-12-15 DOI:10.3205/dgkh000172
Nils-Olaf Hübner, Georg Daeschlein, Christian Lehmann, Sergei Musatkin, Ute Kohlheim, Andreas Gibb, Ojan Assadian, Hiroyoshi Kobayashi
{"title":"Microbiological safety and cost-effectiveness of weekly breathing circuit changes in combination with heat moisture exchange filters: a prospective longitudinal clinical survey.","authors":"Nils-Olaf Hübner,&nbsp;Georg Daeschlein,&nbsp;Christian Lehmann,&nbsp;Sergei Musatkin,&nbsp;Ute Kohlheim,&nbsp;Andreas Gibb,&nbsp;Ojan Assadian,&nbsp;Hiroyoshi Kobayashi","doi":"10.3205/dgkh000172","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To assess the safety and cost effectiveness of a usage for seven days of breathing circuit systems (BCSs) in combination with heat moisture exchanger filters (HMEF) in operation room anesthesia.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>In a prospective longitudinal clinical study, the contamination on high-risk surfaces (HMEF together with inner and outer surface of BCS) was monitored over 1, 2, 5, and 7 days. RESULTS of endogenous respiratory patient flora and contamination flora of BCS, HMEF and bag were compared. Costs of prolonged use of BCS together with HMEF up to 7 days were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Neither physiological respiratory flora nor colonizing pathogens of the oropharynx of the ventilated patients were transmitted through the filters at any time. None of the included patients developed a postoperative pneumonia. Using the BCS for 24 hours provides a cost savings of up to 40% versus single use. Extending the change interval from 24 hours to 48 hours saved over 50% compared to change after each patient, and an additional 19% compared to change after 24 hours. In combination with a HMEF BCS can be used up to 7 days without clinical risk on multiple patients in operation room settings.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Expanding the usage of berating in combination with usage of moist exchange filters is feasible, microbiologically safe and cost effective, as 41% of material costs per ventilation may be saved. Further research is needed to confirm these results.</p>","PeriodicalId":88496,"journal":{"name":"GMS Krankenhaushygiene interdisziplinar","volume":"6 1","pages":"Doc15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3205/dgkh000172","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GMS Krankenhaushygiene interdisziplinar","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3205/dgkh000172","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2011/12/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Aim: To assess the safety and cost effectiveness of a usage for seven days of breathing circuit systems (BCSs) in combination with heat moisture exchanger filters (HMEF) in operation room anesthesia.

Method: In a prospective longitudinal clinical study, the contamination on high-risk surfaces (HMEF together with inner and outer surface of BCS) was monitored over 1, 2, 5, and 7 days. RESULTS of endogenous respiratory patient flora and contamination flora of BCS, HMEF and bag were compared. Costs of prolonged use of BCS together with HMEF up to 7 days were calculated.

Results: Neither physiological respiratory flora nor colonizing pathogens of the oropharynx of the ventilated patients were transmitted through the filters at any time. None of the included patients developed a postoperative pneumonia. Using the BCS for 24 hours provides a cost savings of up to 40% versus single use. Extending the change interval from 24 hours to 48 hours saved over 50% compared to change after each patient, and an additional 19% compared to change after 24 hours. In combination with a HMEF BCS can be used up to 7 days without clinical risk on multiple patients in operation room settings.

Conclusion: Expanding the usage of berating in combination with usage of moist exchange filters is feasible, microbiologically safe and cost effective, as 41% of material costs per ventilation may be saved. Further research is needed to confirm these results.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

微生物安全性和成本效益每周呼吸回路变化结合热湿交换过滤器:一项前瞻性纵向临床调查。
目的:评价7天呼吸回路系统(BCSs)联合热湿交换器过滤器(HMEF)在手术室麻醉中的安全性和成本效益。方法:采用前瞻性纵向临床研究,监测高危表面(HMEF及BCS内、外表面)污染情况1、2、5、7天。结果比较了BCS、HMEF和bag的内源性呼吸道患者菌群和污染菌群。计算BCS与HMEF延长使用至7天的费用。结果:通气患者口咽的生理呼吸菌群和定殖病原体在任何时候都没有通过过滤器传播。纳入的患者均未发生术后肺炎。与单次使用相比,使用BCS 24小时可节省高达40%的成本。将换药间隔从24小时延长到48小时,与每例患者换药后相比可节省50%以上,与24小时后相比可额外节省19%。与HMEF联合使用BCS可在手术室环境中对多名患者使用长达7天而无临床风险。结论:扩大通气与湿交换过滤器联合使用是可行的,微生物安全且经济有效,每次通气可节省41%的材料成本。需要进一步的研究来证实这些结果。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
小红书