{"title":"压力蒸汽灭菌器模拟气体泄漏条件下4种鲍伊-迪克试验的对比研究。","authors":"Xiaomei Yu, Qing Zhang, Xingling Deng, Jinxiu Liang, Shuqin Hao, Jianling Chen, Heying Du","doi":"10.1097/MD.0000000000023653","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We aimed to understand the evaluation of different Bowie-Dick test (B-D test) on the performance of pressure steam sterilization equipment in the case of simulated gas leakage, and we selected a pulsating vacuum steam sterilizer to set 4 different gas leakage levels: 1.1, 1.3, 1.5, and 1.7 mbar/min during the B-D test phase. In terms of methods, 4 different brands of B-D test kits (devices) were tested at 4 different leakage rates, and a total of 48 experiments were conducted. The results from univariate analysis revealed that there are statistically significant differences in the judgment of test results among different personnel and brands. The results from multivariate logistic regression analysis displayed that the difference between different personnel was statistically significant (χ = 45.34, P < .001); the difference between different products was statistically significant (χ = 129.37, P < .001); and there was no statistically significant difference between different degree of leakage (χ = 6.99, P > .05). Result judgments of brand 1 and brand 2 are susceptible to subjective factors. The judgment of brand 3 is intuitive and consistent with the evaluation result of brand 4. In conclusion, the order of capacity to evaluate air leakage from best to worst is brand 4→brand 3→brand 1→brand 2.</p>","PeriodicalId":508590,"journal":{"name":"Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"e23653"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7738145/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative study of four Bowie-Dick test under the condition of pressure steam sterilizer simulating gas leakage.\",\"authors\":\"Xiaomei Yu, Qing Zhang, Xingling Deng, Jinxiu Liang, Shuqin Hao, Jianling Chen, Heying Du\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MD.0000000000023653\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>We aimed to understand the evaluation of different Bowie-Dick test (B-D test) on the performance of pressure steam sterilization equipment in the case of simulated gas leakage, and we selected a pulsating vacuum steam sterilizer to set 4 different gas leakage levels: 1.1, 1.3, 1.5, and 1.7 mbar/min during the B-D test phase. In terms of methods, 4 different brands of B-D test kits (devices) were tested at 4 different leakage rates, and a total of 48 experiments were conducted. The results from univariate analysis revealed that there are statistically significant differences in the judgment of test results among different personnel and brands. The results from multivariate logistic regression analysis displayed that the difference between different personnel was statistically significant (χ = 45.34, P < .001); the difference between different products was statistically significant (χ = 129.37, P < .001); and there was no statistically significant difference between different degree of leakage (χ = 6.99, P > .05). Result judgments of brand 1 and brand 2 are susceptible to subjective factors. The judgment of brand 3 is intuitive and consistent with the evaluation result of brand 4. In conclusion, the order of capacity to evaluate air leakage from best to worst is brand 4→brand 3→brand 1→brand 2.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":508590,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e23653\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7738145/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000023653\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000023653","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
为了了解不同鲍伊-迪克试验(B-D试验)在模拟气体泄漏情况下对压力蒸汽灭菌设备性能的评价,我们选择了脉动真空蒸汽灭菌器,在B-D试验阶段设置了1.1、1.3、1.5和1.7 mbar/min 4种不同的气体泄漏水平。在方法上,采用4种不同品牌的B-D检测试剂盒(装置)在4种不同的泄漏率下进行检测,共进行48次实验。单变量分析结果显示,不同人员、不同品牌对检验结果的判断存在统计学差异。多因素logistic回归分析结果显示,不同人员间差异有统计学意义(χ = 45.34, P .05)。品牌1和品牌2的结果判断容易受到主观因素的影响。品牌3的判断直观,与品牌4的评价结果一致。综上所述,评价漏风能力从好到坏的顺序为:品牌4→品牌3→品牌1→品牌2。
A comparative study of four Bowie-Dick test under the condition of pressure steam sterilizer simulating gas leakage.
We aimed to understand the evaluation of different Bowie-Dick test (B-D test) on the performance of pressure steam sterilization equipment in the case of simulated gas leakage, and we selected a pulsating vacuum steam sterilizer to set 4 different gas leakage levels: 1.1, 1.3, 1.5, and 1.7 mbar/min during the B-D test phase. In terms of methods, 4 different brands of B-D test kits (devices) were tested at 4 different leakage rates, and a total of 48 experiments were conducted. The results from univariate analysis revealed that there are statistically significant differences in the judgment of test results among different personnel and brands. The results from multivariate logistic regression analysis displayed that the difference between different personnel was statistically significant (χ = 45.34, P < .001); the difference between different products was statistically significant (χ = 129.37, P < .001); and there was no statistically significant difference between different degree of leakage (χ = 6.99, P > .05). Result judgments of brand 1 and brand 2 are susceptible to subjective factors. The judgment of brand 3 is intuitive and consistent with the evaluation result of brand 4. In conclusion, the order of capacity to evaluate air leakage from best to worst is brand 4→brand 3→brand 1→brand 2.