评估不同医疗器械包装配置的无菌展示。

Q4 Medicine
Biomedical Instrumentation and Technology Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-25 DOI:10.2345/0899-8205-57.3.87
Selena Qin, Ran Li, Yong Yin, Li Fang
{"title":"评估不同医疗器械包装配置的无菌展示。","authors":"Selena Qin, Ran Li, Yong Yin, Li Fang","doi":"10.2345/0899-8205-57.3.87","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Medical Device Regulation (MDR) of the European Union (EU) places greater emphasis on the usability of medical devices, with the goal of eliminating or reducing the risk of infection to patients. As this goal also is applicable to sterile packaging, ANSI/AAMI/ISO 11607-1:2019 introduced a usability evaluation requirement for aseptic presentation of terminally sterilized medical devices. In an effort to reduce contamination risks, this requirement focuses specifically on the sterile barrier system (SBS). However, research is limited on evaluating the usability of SBSs and their performance, from an aseptic presentation standpoint, in clinical settings. To address this research gap, we assessed 14 sterile medical devices with five different SBS configurations to elucidate how SBS configuration (type, size, and number of SBS layers) and user satisfaction levels affect usability. A total of 40 experienced clinical nurses participated in 280 individual trials (20 per SBS configuration), which were conducted in a simulated operating room. Ultraviolet fluorescent powder was used to simulate the contamination process and to evaluate the success or failure of the aseptic presentation. Pouch and tray configurations exhibited the best overall performance, while vent bags performed poorly and were considered less acceptable. Double SBS configurations outperformed single SBS configurations. The study highlighted the importance of appropriate SBS symbols to identify SBS layers, which is another patient safety-related requirement of the EU MDR. The current work also includes an analysis of the powder contamination method used in conducting the usability evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":35656,"journal":{"name":"Biomedical Instrumentation and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10512998/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating Aseptic Presentation of Different Medical Device Packaging Configurations.\",\"authors\":\"Selena Qin, Ran Li, Yong Yin, Li Fang\",\"doi\":\"10.2345/0899-8205-57.3.87\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Medical Device Regulation (MDR) of the European Union (EU) places greater emphasis on the usability of medical devices, with the goal of eliminating or reducing the risk of infection to patients. As this goal also is applicable to sterile packaging, ANSI/AAMI/ISO 11607-1:2019 introduced a usability evaluation requirement for aseptic presentation of terminally sterilized medical devices. In an effort to reduce contamination risks, this requirement focuses specifically on the sterile barrier system (SBS). However, research is limited on evaluating the usability of SBSs and their performance, from an aseptic presentation standpoint, in clinical settings. To address this research gap, we assessed 14 sterile medical devices with five different SBS configurations to elucidate how SBS configuration (type, size, and number of SBS layers) and user satisfaction levels affect usability. A total of 40 experienced clinical nurses participated in 280 individual trials (20 per SBS configuration), which were conducted in a simulated operating room. Ultraviolet fluorescent powder was used to simulate the contamination process and to evaluate the success or failure of the aseptic presentation. Pouch and tray configurations exhibited the best overall performance, while vent bags performed poorly and were considered less acceptable. Double SBS configurations outperformed single SBS configurations. The study highlighted the importance of appropriate SBS symbols to identify SBS layers, which is another patient safety-related requirement of the EU MDR. The current work also includes an analysis of the powder contamination method used in conducting the usability evaluation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35656,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biomedical Instrumentation and Technology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10512998/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biomedical Instrumentation and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2345/0899-8205-57.3.87\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomedical Instrumentation and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2345/0899-8205-57.3.87","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

欧洲联盟(EU)的《医疗器械条例》(MDR)更加强调医疗器械的可用性,目的是消除或降低患者感染的风险。由于这一目标也适用于无菌包装,ANSI/AAMI/ISO 11607-1:2019引入了最终灭菌医疗器械无菌展示的可用性评估要求。为了降低污染风险,本要求特别关注无菌屏障系统(SBS)。然而,在临床环境中,从无菌表现的角度评估SBS的可用性及其性能的研究有限。为了弥补这一研究空白,我们评估了14种具有五种不同SBS配置的无菌医疗设备,以阐明SBS配置(SBS层的类型、大小和数量)和用户满意度如何影响可用性。共有40名经验丰富的临床护士参加了280项个人试验(每个SBS配置20项),这些试验在模拟手术室中进行。紫外线荧光粉用于模拟污染过程,并评估无菌演示的成功或失败。袋子和托盘配置表现出最佳的整体性能,而通风袋表现不佳,被认为不太可接受。双SBS配置的性能优于单SBS配置。该研究强调了适当的SBS符号对识别SBS层的重要性,这是欧盟MDR的另一项与患者安全相关的要求。目前的工作还包括对进行可用性评估时使用的粉末污染方法的分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating Aseptic Presentation of Different Medical Device Packaging Configurations.

The Medical Device Regulation (MDR) of the European Union (EU) places greater emphasis on the usability of medical devices, with the goal of eliminating or reducing the risk of infection to patients. As this goal also is applicable to sterile packaging, ANSI/AAMI/ISO 11607-1:2019 introduced a usability evaluation requirement for aseptic presentation of terminally sterilized medical devices. In an effort to reduce contamination risks, this requirement focuses specifically on the sterile barrier system (SBS). However, research is limited on evaluating the usability of SBSs and their performance, from an aseptic presentation standpoint, in clinical settings. To address this research gap, we assessed 14 sterile medical devices with five different SBS configurations to elucidate how SBS configuration (type, size, and number of SBS layers) and user satisfaction levels affect usability. A total of 40 experienced clinical nurses participated in 280 individual trials (20 per SBS configuration), which were conducted in a simulated operating room. Ultraviolet fluorescent powder was used to simulate the contamination process and to evaluate the success or failure of the aseptic presentation. Pouch and tray configurations exhibited the best overall performance, while vent bags performed poorly and were considered less acceptable. Double SBS configurations outperformed single SBS configurations. The study highlighted the importance of appropriate SBS symbols to identify SBS layers, which is another patient safety-related requirement of the EU MDR. The current work also includes an analysis of the powder contamination method used in conducting the usability evaluation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Biomedical Instrumentation and Technology
Biomedical Instrumentation and Technology Computer Science-Computer Networks and Communications
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: AAMI publishes Biomedical Instrumentation & Technology (BI&T) a bi-monthly peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the developers, managers, and users of medical instrumentation and technology.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信