速干消毒剂与乙醇消毒听诊器听筒的效果分析

发布时间：2019-06-02 14:59

【摘要】：目的分析比较速干手消毒剂与75%乙醇消毒听诊器听筒的效果。方法将20个临床医生随机分为观察组和对照组,每组各10人,每个医生配有专用听诊器,在听诊患者前后消毒听筒。对照组的使用75%乙醇棉球消毒,观察组的使用速干手消毒剂消毒,每次消毒后晾干,由感染控制室专职人员取样本送细菌培养。观察记录两组医生对听筒消毒的执行情况和感染控制室对听筒表面的微生物检测结果。结果观察组和对照组的听筒消毒率分别为91.0%和34.3%,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。平均菌落数分别为(2.08±0.21)cfu/cm2和(2.31±0.29)cfu/cm2,合格率分别为99.9%与98.8%,差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。平均完成时间分别为(0.45±0.09)min和(2.7±0.14)min,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论速干消毒剂消毒听诊器可以提高消毒率,且安全有效、方便快捷,有利于提高工作效率,值得进一步应用。
[Abstract]:Objective to analyze and compare the effect of quick dry hand disinfectant and 75% ethanol disinfection stethoscope. Methods Twenty clinicians were randomly divided into observation group (n = 10) and control group (n = 10). Each doctor was equipped with a special stethoscope to disinfect the receiver before and after auscultation. The control group was sterilized with 75% ethanol cotton ball, and the observation group was sterilized with quick-drying hand disinfectant. After each disinfection, the samples were taken and sent to bacterial culture by the full-time personnel in the infection control room. The implementation of disinfection of the receiver by the two groups of doctors and the results of microbial detection on the surface of the receiver in the infection control room were observed and recorded. Results the disinfection rate of receiver in observation group and control group was 91.0% and 34.3% respectively, the difference was statistically significant (P 0.05). The average colony number was (2.08 卤0.21) cfu/cm2 and (2.31 卤0.29) cfu/cm2, respectively, and the qualified rates were 99.9% and 98.8%, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P 0.05). The average completion time was (0.45 卤0.09) min and (2.7 卤0.14) min, respectively. Conclusion the disinfection stethoscope with quick drying disinfectant can improve the disinfection rate, which is safe, effective, convenient and fast, which is beneficial to improve the working efficiency and is worthy of further application.
【作者单位】：成都蓝海医院;
【分类号】：R187

【参考文献】