Suppr超能文献

四种软式内镜清洗消毒机的清洗消毒效果比较。

Comparison of the cleaning and disinfecting efficacy of four washer-disinfectors for flexible endoscopes.

作者信息

Kircheis U, Martiny H

机构信息

Technische Hygiene, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany.

出版信息

J Hosp Infect. 2007 Jul;66(3):255-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2007.03.020. Epub 2007 May 30.

Abstract

Four washer-disinfectors (AdaptaScope, ETD-2Plus, Innova-E3, LS-2000) were compared. The cleaning and process efficacies of the washer-disinfectors were determined by visible examination and by microbial reduction factor (RF) using the German test method (EN ISO/TS 15883-5). Test pieces were contaminated with blood and Enterococcus faecium. Three cleaners (Cidezyme GI, ETD Cleaner, Liquid 52) and three disinfectants (Cidex OPA-C, ETD Disinfectant, Liquid 44) were used. The cleaning efficacy was also tested with water alone. Effectiveness of Cidezyme GI in the AdaptaScope was determined with an RF of 7.0, in the LS-2000 with an RF of 8.4; Liquid 52 obtained in the LS-2000 an RF of 7.0. The cleaning efficacies with water for the AdaptaScope (RF 2.1) and the LS-2000 (RF 1.2) were significantly different. Microbiological effectiveness of overall processes obtained in the AdaptaScope with Cidezyme GI/Cidex OPA-C (RF 8.4) and in the LS-2000 with Liquid 52/Liquid 44 (RF 9.2) were also significantly different. The test pieces remained contaminated at the end of overall processes in the Innova-E3 and an RF could not be established. In the ETD-2Plus the RFs after the total processes were low (3.7-7.5 and 1.8). The AdaptaScope and LS-2000 consistently produced a microbial reduction, although differences in the efficacy of the overall processes were observed. Processing endoscopes with artificially blocked channels in the AdaptaScope and LS-2000 incurred error messages and the processes stopped whereas the ETD-2Plus and Innova-E3 did not display error messages.

摘要

对四台清洗消毒器(AdaptaScope、ETD - 2Plus、Innova - E3、LS - 2000)进行了比较。通过目视检查以及使用德国测试方法(EN ISO/TS 15883 - 5)的微生物减少因子(RF)来确定清洗消毒器的清洁和处理效果。测试片被血液和粪肠球菌污染。使用了三种清洁剂(Cidezyme GI、ETD Cleaner、Liquid 52)和三种消毒剂(Cidex OPA - C、ETD Disinfectant、Liquid 44)。还单独用水测试了清洁效果。Cidezyme GI在AdaptaScope中的微生物减少因子为7.0,在LS - 2000中为8.4;Liquid 52在LS - 2000中的微生物减少因子为7.0。AdaptaScope(微生物减少因子为2.1)和LS - 2000(微生物减少因子为1.2)单独用水清洗时的清洁效果有显著差异。在AdaptaScope中使用Cidezyme GI/Cidex OPA - C(微生物减少因子为8.4)以及在LS - 2000中使用Liquid 52/Liquid 44(微生物减少因子为9.2)所获得的整个过程的微生物学效果也有显著差异。在Innova - E3中,测试片在整个过程结束时仍有污染,无法确定微生物减少因子。在ETD - 2Plus中,整个过程后的微生物减少因子较低(3.7 - 7.5和1.8)。尽管观察到整个过程的效果存在差异,但AdaptaScope和LS - 2000始终能实现微生物减少。在AdaptaScope和LS - 2000中处理人工堵塞通道的内窥镜时会出现错误信息,过程停止,而ETD - 2Plus和Innova - E3未显示错误信息。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验