Thomas Corey Davis, Beverly George Gay, Melissa Jamerson, Sarah A. Marrs, Ronsard Daniel, Chuck J. Biddle
{"title":"降低麻醉期间医院感染风险的创新方法","authors":"Thomas Corey Davis, Beverly George Gay, Melissa Jamerson, Sarah A. Marrs, Ronsard Daniel, Chuck J. Biddle","doi":"10.29074/ascls.2020002246","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>ABSTRACT</h3> Infection control concerns abound in the surgical anesthesia workstation, placing patients and providers at significant, documented risk because of many factors, including provider hand hygiene lapses, equipment design and complexity, and challenging disinfection. A trial was performed to mitigate cross-contamination involving 30 general anesthesia surgical operations matched 1:1 as control (no intervention) or intervention group (condom-like barriers to 4 anesthesia workstation components that are frequently touched and contaminated and very difficult to disinfect). Wraps were removed at the end of the operation and then replaced with fresh ones before the start of the subsequent operation. Baseline culture samples were obtained prior to the first surgical operation of the day in each room and then performed on operations that followed in each room over a 3-day period. Baseline colony-forming unit density was equivalent in both conditions with total density significantly lower in the covered/wrapped (mean rank = 5.81) vs uncovered condition (mean rank = 11.19) at <i>P</i> < 0.01, <i>r</i> = −0.64. Bacterial species diversity was markedly decreased in the covered condition. The covered condition served as a barrier to contamination of apparatus elements, preventing downstream patient exposure and mitigating between-procedure disinfection need. Intervention group providers were debriefed, finding only rare, addressable concerns. This research further validates the need for routine, periodic culturing of anesthetic apparatus to reveal lapses in provider behaviors and disinfection practices.","PeriodicalId":72611,"journal":{"name":"Clinical laboratory science : journal of the American Society for Medical Technology","volume":"97 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Innovative Approach to Moderating Risk of Nosocomial Infection During Anesthesia\",\"authors\":\"Thomas Corey Davis, Beverly George Gay, Melissa Jamerson, Sarah A. Marrs, Ronsard Daniel, Chuck J. Biddle\",\"doi\":\"10.29074/ascls.2020002246\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>ABSTRACT</h3> Infection control concerns abound in the surgical anesthesia workstation, placing patients and providers at significant, documented risk because of many factors, including provider hand hygiene lapses, equipment design and complexity, and challenging disinfection. A trial was performed to mitigate cross-contamination involving 30 general anesthesia surgical operations matched 1:1 as control (no intervention) or intervention group (condom-like barriers to 4 anesthesia workstation components that are frequently touched and contaminated and very difficult to disinfect). Wraps were removed at the end of the operation and then replaced with fresh ones before the start of the subsequent operation. Baseline culture samples were obtained prior to the first surgical operation of the day in each room and then performed on operations that followed in each room over a 3-day period. Baseline colony-forming unit density was equivalent in both conditions with total density significantly lower in the covered/wrapped (mean rank = 5.81) vs uncovered condition (mean rank = 11.19) at <i>P</i> < 0.01, <i>r</i> = −0.64. Bacterial species diversity was markedly decreased in the covered condition. The covered condition served as a barrier to contamination of apparatus elements, preventing downstream patient exposure and mitigating between-procedure disinfection need. Intervention group providers were debriefed, finding only rare, addressable concerns. This research further validates the need for routine, periodic culturing of anesthetic apparatus to reveal lapses in provider behaviors and disinfection practices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":72611,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical laboratory science : journal of the American Society for Medical Technology\",\"volume\":\"97 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical laboratory science : journal of the American Society for Medical Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29074/ascls.2020002246\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical laboratory science : journal of the American Society for Medical Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29074/ascls.2020002246","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
手术麻醉工作站的感染控制问题比比皆是,由于许多因素,包括提供者的手部卫生失误、设备设计和复杂性,以及具有挑战性的消毒,使患者和提供者处于显著的、有记录的风险中。为了减少交叉污染,我们进行了一项试验,选取30例全麻手术,按1:1的比例作为对照组(无干预组)和干预组(对4个经常接触和污染且很难消毒的麻醉工作站部件设置避孕套状屏障)。在手术结束时取出包裹,然后在后续手术开始前换上新的包裹。在每个房间当天的第一次手术之前获得基线培养样本,然后在每个房间进行为期3天的后续手术。两种条件下的基线菌落形成单位密度相等,P <时,覆盖/包裹条件下的总密度(平均等级= 5.81)显著低于未覆盖条件下的总密度(平均等级= 11.19);0.01, r =−0.64。覆盖条件下细菌种类多样性明显降低。被覆盖的条件作为仪器元件污染的屏障,防止下游患者接触并减轻手术之间的消毒需求。对干预小组的提供者进行了汇报,只发现了一些罕见的、可解决的问题。本研究进一步验证了常规、定期培养麻醉器械的必要性,以揭示提供者行为和消毒实践中的失误。
Innovative Approach to Moderating Risk of Nosocomial Infection During Anesthesia
ABSTRACT
Infection control concerns abound in the surgical anesthesia workstation, placing patients and providers at significant, documented risk because of many factors, including provider hand hygiene lapses, equipment design and complexity, and challenging disinfection. A trial was performed to mitigate cross-contamination involving 30 general anesthesia surgical operations matched 1:1 as control (no intervention) or intervention group (condom-like barriers to 4 anesthesia workstation components that are frequently touched and contaminated and very difficult to disinfect). Wraps were removed at the end of the operation and then replaced with fresh ones before the start of the subsequent operation. Baseline culture samples were obtained prior to the first surgical operation of the day in each room and then performed on operations that followed in each room over a 3-day period. Baseline colony-forming unit density was equivalent in both conditions with total density significantly lower in the covered/wrapped (mean rank = 5.81) vs uncovered condition (mean rank = 11.19) at P < 0.01, r = −0.64. Bacterial species diversity was markedly decreased in the covered condition. The covered condition served as a barrier to contamination of apparatus elements, preventing downstream patient exposure and mitigating between-procedure disinfection need. Intervention group providers were debriefed, finding only rare, addressable concerns. This research further validates the need for routine, periodic culturing of anesthetic apparatus to reveal lapses in provider behaviors and disinfection practices.