用户名: 密码: 验证码:
全自动清洗消毒器与超声波清洗机洗涤医疗器械的效果对比分析
详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |
  • 英文篇名:Comparative Analysis of the Effects of Automatic Cleaning and Disinfecting Device and Ultrasonic Cleaning Machine on Washing Medical Instruments
  • 作者:仲建婷
  • 英文作者:ZHONG Jian-ting;The Second Hospital of Lanzhou University;
  • 关键词:超声波清洗机 ; 医疗器械 ; 全自动清洗消毒器
  • 英文关键词:Ultrasonic cleaning machine;;Medical equipment;;Sutomatic cleaning and sterilizer
  • 中文刊名:ZHJK
  • 英文刊名:Smart Healthcare
  • 机构:兰州大学第二医院;
  • 出版日期:2019-06-15
  • 出版单位:智慧健康
  • 年:2019
  • 期:v.5
  • 语种:中文;
  • 页:ZHJK201917073
  • 页数:2
  • CN:17
  • ISSN:10-1365/TN
  • 分类号:162-163
摘要
目的对比分析对医疗器械行全自动清洗消毒器与超声波清洗机洗涤的效果情况。方法选择在2018年1月至2018年10月我院常用的120件医疗器械,随机分为两组,参照组(60件)行全自动清洗消毒器洗涤,实验组(60件)行超声波清洗机洗涤,观察统计两组RLU值以及清洗合格率情况,并予以对比分析。结果除普通类医疗器械,实验组管腔类医疗器械等RLU值均显著优于参照组(P<0.05);实验组与参照组医疗器械清洗合格率分别为96.67%、73.33%,组间对比实验组合格率明显更高(P<0.05)。结论同全自动清洗消毒器洗涤方式对比,对医疗器械行超声波清洗机洗涤的合格率更高,但就普通类医疗器械而言,选择全自动清洗消毒器洗涤方式更能够提升工作效率。
        Objective To compare and analyze the effects of automatic washing and disinfecting and ultrasonic cleaning on medical devices. Methods One hundred and twenty pieces of medical instruments commonly used in our hospital from January 2018 to October 2018 were selected and randomly divided into two groups. The reference group(60 pieces) was washed with automatic cleaning disinfector, and the experimental group(60 pieces) was washed with ultrasonic cleaning machine. The RLU values and the qualified rate of cleaning were observed and analyzed. Results The RLU values of lumen medical devices in the experimental group were significantly better than those in the control group(P<0.05), except for common medical devices. The qualified rates of cleaning medical devices in the experimental group and the control group were 96.67% and 73.33%, respectively, and the rate of combination of experimental groups was significantly higher than that in the control group(P<0.05). Conclusion Compared with the automatic cleaning and disinfector washing method,the qualified rate of ultrasonic cleaning machine for medical devices is higher, but for general medical devices, the choice of automatic cleaning and disinfector washing method can improve work efficiency.
引文
[1]丁赟,王开秀,韦秀佳,等.两种清洗消毒方法对不同医疗器械的洗涤效果分析[J].中外医学研究,2017,15(6):159-160.
    [2]林翠绒,杨月玲.消毒供应中心手术医疗器械清洗质量影响因素及对策[J].中国卫生标准管理,2017,8(22):139-141.
    [3]张沿.医疗器械2种清洗消毒方法的效果比较探讨[J].中国医疗器械信息,2017,23(15):149-150.
    [4]陈晟.多酶清洗剂浸泡配合超声波清洗法对医疗器械清洗消毒的效果分析[J].首都食品与医药,2017,24(4):15-16.
    [5]林学英.不同清洗方法对轴节齿类医疗器械清洗效果分析[J].大家健康旬刊,2016,10(9):288.
    [6]艾素娥.消毒供应室妇科人工流产器械的清洗措施探讨[J].中国医疗器械信息,2016,22(2):88-89.
    [7]何敏.消毒供应中心两种超声清洗方式的清洗效果分析[J].中国卫生标准管理,2017,8(1):136-137.
    [8]李宝珍.应用ATP生物荧光检测法评价医疗器械清洗质量[J].中国感染控制杂志,2016,15(1):59-60.
    [9]张伟.残留蛋白对医疗器械清洗质量的评价[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2016,26(1):229-231.
    [10]邓碧环,王聪,黄瑜.复用医疗器械清洗消毒后不同保存方法对器械清洁度的影响[J].护理实践与研究,2016,13(5):129-130.
    [11]纪友霞.不同清洗方法对轴节齿类医疗器械清洗效果观察[J].中国消毒学杂志,2016,33(1):81-82.
    [12]王建芳.应用清洗消毒机对医疗器械清洗消毒的效果观察[J].临床医药文献电子杂志,2016,3(19):3813.

© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号

地址:北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编:100083

电话:办公室:(+86 10)66554848;文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新:66554700