不同清洗方法对骨锉的清洗效果观察

发布时间：2018-10-24 21:52

【摘要】：目的比较不同清洗方式对骨锉的清洗效果影响,以提高骨锉在消毒供应中心(CSSD)清洗合格率。方法将骨科手术包中使用过的1 354把骨锉,根据污染程度随机分为A、B、C、D 4组,分别采用不同的清洗方式对其进行清洗,A组采用冲洗+机洗、B组采用冲洗+超声酶洗+机洗、C组采用冲洗+超声酶洗+刷洗+机洗、D组采用预浸泡+冲洗+超声酶洗+刷洗+机洗,然后通过肉眼目测、放大镜观察以及ATP检测法进行清洗效果的对比,数据采用SPSS12.0统计软件处理。结果通过肉眼目测、放大镜以及ATP监测显示,D组骨锉的清洗合格率最高,分别为99.10%、93.99%、99.10%,A组清洗合格率最低,分别为57.26%、53.09%、41.64%,不同的清洗方式之间,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);所有的骨锉功能性无明显改变。结论超声酶洗和刷洗是提高骨锉清洗合格率,保证清洗质量的重要步骤;不同的清洗方式对骨锉功能性无影响。
[Abstract]:Objective to compare the effect of different cleaning methods on the cleaning effect of bone file and improve the qualified rate of (CSSD) cleaning in disinfection supply center. Methods 1 354 bone files used in orthopedic surgical kits were randomly divided into 4 groups according to the degree of contamination. Different cleaning methods were used to wash it. Group A used washing machine washing, group B washing ultrasonic enzyme washing machine washing, group C using washing ultrasonic enzyme washing machine washing, group D using pre-immersion washing ultrasonic washing. Enzyme washing machine washing, Then the cleaning effect was compared by naked eye observation, magnifying glass observation and ATP detection. The data were processed by SPSS12.0 statistical software. Results according to naked eye, magnifying glass and ATP monitoring, the qualified rate of bone file cleaning in group D was the highest, which was 99.109.99 and 99.10100.The qualification rate of cleaning in group A was the lowest, 57.2653.09 and 41.64, respectively, between different cleaning methods. The difference was statistically significant (P 0.05); the function of all bone files had no significant change. Conclusion Ultrasonic enzyme washing and brushing is an important step to improve the qualified rate of bone file cleaning and ensure the cleaning quality, and different cleaning methods have no effect on the function of bone file.
【作者单位】：河北医科大学第三医院消毒供应中心;
【基金】：河北省医学科学研究基金项目(2012114)
【分类号】：R187.4

【参考文献】