Henry L Wyneken, Audrey A Cerles, Kelly N Kim, Christine Heren, Emma J Reuter, Colin McCarty, Kaylin Chen, Sean Daly, Lauren Gherman, Iqra Imran, Alannah Miller, Caitlin Wrinn, Andrea Valladares, Adam E J Fleming, Rebecca Roberts, Rocco Casagrande
{"title":"用不同方法打开微量离心管时的飞溅率。","authors":"Henry L Wyneken, Audrey A Cerles, Kelly N Kim, Christine Heren, Emma J Reuter, Colin McCarty, Kaylin Chen, Sean Daly, Lauren Gherman, Iqra Imran, Alannah Miller, Caitlin Wrinn, Andrea Valladares, Adam E J Fleming, Rebecca Roberts, Rocco Casagrande","doi":"10.1089/apb.2022.0035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Snap-cap microcentrifuge tubes are ubiquitous in biological laboratories. However, limited data are available on how frequently splashes occur when opening them. These data would be valuable for biorisk management in the laboratory.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The frequency of splashes from opening snap-cap tubes using four different methods was tested. The splash frequency for each method was measured on the benchtop surface and on the experimenter's gloves and smock, using a Glo Germ solution as a tracer.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Splashes occurred very frequently when opening microcentrifuge snap-cap tubes, no matter which method was used to open the tube. The highest rate of splashes on all surfaces was observed with the one-handed (OH) opening method compared with two-handed methods. Across all methods, the highest rate of splashes was observed on the opener's gloves (70-97%) compared with the benchtop (2-40%) or the body of the researcher (0-7%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>All tube opening methods we studied frequently caused splashes, with the OH method being the most error-prone but no two-handed method being clearly superior to any other. In addition to posing an exposure risk to laboratory personnel, experimental repeatability may be affected due to loss of volume when using snap-cap tubes. The rate of splashes underscores the importance of secondary containment, personal protective equipment, and good protocols for decontamination. When working with especially hazardous materials, alternatives to snap-cap tubes (such as screw cap tubes) should be strongly considered. Future studies can examine other methods of opening snap-cap tubes to determine whether a truly safe method exists.</p>","PeriodicalId":7962,"journal":{"name":"Applied Biosafety","volume":"28 2","pages":"123-129"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10278008/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rate of Splashes When Opening Microfuge Tubes with Various Methods.\",\"authors\":\"Henry L Wyneken, Audrey A Cerles, Kelly N Kim, Christine Heren, Emma J Reuter, Colin McCarty, Kaylin Chen, Sean Daly, Lauren Gherman, Iqra Imran, Alannah Miller, Caitlin Wrinn, Andrea Valladares, Adam E J Fleming, Rebecca Roberts, Rocco Casagrande\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/apb.2022.0035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Snap-cap microcentrifuge tubes are ubiquitous in biological laboratories. However, limited data are available on how frequently splashes occur when opening them. These data would be valuable for biorisk management in the laboratory.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The frequency of splashes from opening snap-cap tubes using four different methods was tested. The splash frequency for each method was measured on the benchtop surface and on the experimenter's gloves and smock, using a Glo Germ solution as a tracer.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Splashes occurred very frequently when opening microcentrifuge snap-cap tubes, no matter which method was used to open the tube. The highest rate of splashes on all surfaces was observed with the one-handed (OH) opening method compared with two-handed methods. Across all methods, the highest rate of splashes was observed on the opener's gloves (70-97%) compared with the benchtop (2-40%) or the body of the researcher (0-7%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>All tube opening methods we studied frequently caused splashes, with the OH method being the most error-prone but no two-handed method being clearly superior to any other. In addition to posing an exposure risk to laboratory personnel, experimental repeatability may be affected due to loss of volume when using snap-cap tubes. The rate of splashes underscores the importance of secondary containment, personal protective equipment, and good protocols for decontamination. When working with especially hazardous materials, alternatives to snap-cap tubes (such as screw cap tubes) should be strongly considered. Future studies can examine other methods of opening snap-cap tubes to determine whether a truly safe method exists.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7962,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Biosafety\",\"volume\":\"28 2\",\"pages\":\"123-129\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10278008/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Biosafety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/apb.2022.0035\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/6/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Biosafety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/apb.2022.0035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Rate of Splashes When Opening Microfuge Tubes with Various Methods.
Introduction: Snap-cap microcentrifuge tubes are ubiquitous in biological laboratories. However, limited data are available on how frequently splashes occur when opening them. These data would be valuable for biorisk management in the laboratory.
Methods: The frequency of splashes from opening snap-cap tubes using four different methods was tested. The splash frequency for each method was measured on the benchtop surface and on the experimenter's gloves and smock, using a Glo Germ solution as a tracer.
Results: Splashes occurred very frequently when opening microcentrifuge snap-cap tubes, no matter which method was used to open the tube. The highest rate of splashes on all surfaces was observed with the one-handed (OH) opening method compared with two-handed methods. Across all methods, the highest rate of splashes was observed on the opener's gloves (70-97%) compared with the benchtop (2-40%) or the body of the researcher (0-7%).
Conclusions: All tube opening methods we studied frequently caused splashes, with the OH method being the most error-prone but no two-handed method being clearly superior to any other. In addition to posing an exposure risk to laboratory personnel, experimental repeatability may be affected due to loss of volume when using snap-cap tubes. The rate of splashes underscores the importance of secondary containment, personal protective equipment, and good protocols for decontamination. When working with especially hazardous materials, alternatives to snap-cap tubes (such as screw cap tubes) should be strongly considered. Future studies can examine other methods of opening snap-cap tubes to determine whether a truly safe method exists.
Applied BiosafetyEnvironmental Science-Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
13.30%
发文量
27
期刊介绍:
Applied Biosafety (APB), sponsored by ABSA International, is a peer-reviewed, scientific journal committed to promoting global biosafety awareness and best practices to prevent occupational exposures and adverse environmental impacts related to biohazardous releases. APB provides a forum for exchanging sound biosafety and biosecurity initiatives by publishing original articles, review articles, letters to the editors, commentaries, and brief reviews. APB informs scientists, safety professionals, policymakers, engineers, architects, and governmental organizations. The journal is committed to publishing on topics significant in well-resourced countries as well as information relevant to underserved regions, engaging and cultivating the development of biosafety professionals globally.