Can a humid storage environment of surgical instruments before reprocessing increase patient safety and durability of instruments?

National and international guidelines recommend reprocessing of medical instruments to commence as soon as possible post-surgery; furthermore, they recommend that transport and storage of surgical instruments postoperatively occurs in a moist, humid atmosphere. The concern is that a dry storage envi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of hospital infection 2022-04, Vol.122, p.64-71
Hauptverfasser: Rubak, P., Lorenzen, J., Ripadal, K., Christensen, A-E., Aaen, D., Nielsen, H.L., Bundgaard, K.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 71
container_issue
container_start_page 64
container_title The Journal of hospital infection
container_volume 122
creator Rubak, P.
Lorenzen, J.
Ripadal, K.
Christensen, A-E.
Aaen, D.
Nielsen, H.L.
Bundgaard, K.
description National and international guidelines recommend reprocessing of medical instruments to commence as soon as possible post-surgery; furthermore, they recommend that transport and storage of surgical instruments postoperatively occurs in a moist, humid atmosphere. The concern is that a dry storage environment results in deterioration of instruments. To evaluate whether residual protein or corrosion is associated with storage environment (dry or humid), holding time or number of treatment cycles. The range of protein residue and corrosion were tested on surgical instruments contaminated with human blood amended Enterococcus faecalis ATCC 29212. Subsequently instruments were stored for 6, 12 and 24 h in dry or humid conditions. After one, 25 and 50 reprocessing cycles, instruments were examined for protein residues using the o-phthaldialdehyde (OPA) method or corrosion using stereomicroscopy, scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive spectroscopy. Protein residue found on instruments was 21.5–54.0 μg and corrosion corresponded to 0–5% of the inspected area. No associations between storage environment and protein residue (adjusted mean difference = 0.48, 95% confidence interval: -0.42, 1.37, P=0.30) or corrosion (P=0.20) were identified. Higher numbers of treatment cycles showed higher amounts of corrosion (mean: 1cycle = 0.06%, 25cycles = 0.52% and 50cycles = 1.45%). In contrast, higher numbers of treatment cycles showed lower amounts of protein residue (P
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jhin.2022.01.012
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2622964385</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0195670122000275</els_id><sourcerecordid>2622964385</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-eabadfd4f9295a08f7e5fdc715fcc0a8cafae088522bed8f59a8fe9a99b7cd603</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE9r3DAQxUVpaTZJv0APRcdcvJHkyJYgEMrS_IFALs1ZjKXRRostbyU7kGs-eWU2KTkVBoRm3vsx8wj5ztmaM96c79a7pxDXggmxZryU-ERWXNaiErrWn8mKcS2rpmX8iBznvGOMlb78So5qydpWMbUirxuIFOjTPARH8zQm2CLF-BzSGAeMEx09zXPaBgs9DTFPaV7amXbox4Q04T6NFnMOcVvmNiFkpHuYwmLO4HF6oRAddXOCLvShfAvyA-nqlHzx0Gf89vaekMfrX783t9X9w83d5ud9ZWvJpwqhA-fdhddCS2DKtyi9sy2X3loGyoIHZEpJITp0yksNyqMGrbvWuobVJ-TswC0b_5kxT2YI2WLfQ8RxzkY0QujmolaySMVBatOYc0Jv9ikMkF4MZ2bJ3uzMkr1ZsjeMlxLF9OONP3cDun-W97CL4PIgwHLlc8Bksi0xWXQhoZ2MG8P_-H8BT4eang</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2622964385</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Can a humid storage environment of surgical instruments before reprocessing increase patient safety and durability of instruments?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Rubak, P. ; Lorenzen, J. ; Ripadal, K. ; Christensen, A-E. ; Aaen, D. ; Nielsen, H.L. ; Bundgaard, K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Rubak, P. ; Lorenzen, J. ; Ripadal, K. ; Christensen, A-E. ; Aaen, D. ; Nielsen, H.L. ; Bundgaard, K.</creatorcontrib><description>National and international guidelines recommend reprocessing of medical instruments to commence as soon as possible post-surgery; furthermore, they recommend that transport and storage of surgical instruments postoperatively occurs in a moist, humid atmosphere. The concern is that a dry storage environment results in deterioration of instruments. To evaluate whether residual protein or corrosion is associated with storage environment (dry or humid), holding time or number of treatment cycles. The range of protein residue and corrosion were tested on surgical instruments contaminated with human blood amended Enterococcus faecalis ATCC 29212. Subsequently instruments were stored for 6, 12 and 24 h in dry or humid conditions. After one, 25 and 50 reprocessing cycles, instruments were examined for protein residues using the o-phthaldialdehyde (OPA) method or corrosion using stereomicroscopy, scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive spectroscopy. Protein residue found on instruments was 21.5–54.0 μg and corrosion corresponded to 0–5% of the inspected area. No associations between storage environment and protein residue (adjusted mean difference = 0.48, 95% confidence interval: -0.42, 1.37, P=0.30) or corrosion (P=0.20) were identified. Higher numbers of treatment cycles showed higher amounts of corrosion (mean: 1cycle = 0.06%, 25cycles = 0.52% and 50cycles = 1.45%). In contrast, higher numbers of treatment cycles showed lower amounts of protein residue (P&lt;0.001). We found both lower protein residue concentration and lower corrosion rating at 12 h compared with 6 and 24 h holding time. Cleanliness and durability of instruments before reprocessing seems not to be affected by storage environment or holding time but instead by number of treatment cycles.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0195-6701</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-2939</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2022.01.012</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35077808</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Corrosion ; Enterococcus faecalis ATCC 29212 ; Humans ; Microscopy, Electron, Scanning ; o-Phthalaldehyde ; Patient Safety ; Protein residue ; Reprocessing ; Storage environment ; Surgical Instruments</subject><ispartof>The Journal of hospital infection, 2022-04, Vol.122, p.64-71</ispartof><rights>2022 The Authors</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-eabadfd4f9295a08f7e5fdc715fcc0a8cafae088522bed8f59a8fe9a99b7cd603</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2022.01.012$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,3537,27905,27906,45976</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35077808$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rubak, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lorenzen, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ripadal, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Christensen, A-E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aaen, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nielsen, H.L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bundgaard, K.</creatorcontrib><title>Can a humid storage environment of surgical instruments before reprocessing increase patient safety and durability of instruments?</title><title>The Journal of hospital infection</title><addtitle>J Hosp Infect</addtitle><description>National and international guidelines recommend reprocessing of medical instruments to commence as soon as possible post-surgery; furthermore, they recommend that transport and storage of surgical instruments postoperatively occurs in a moist, humid atmosphere. The concern is that a dry storage environment results in deterioration of instruments. To evaluate whether residual protein or corrosion is associated with storage environment (dry or humid), holding time or number of treatment cycles. The range of protein residue and corrosion were tested on surgical instruments contaminated with human blood amended Enterococcus faecalis ATCC 29212. Subsequently instruments were stored for 6, 12 and 24 h in dry or humid conditions. After one, 25 and 50 reprocessing cycles, instruments were examined for protein residues using the o-phthaldialdehyde (OPA) method or corrosion using stereomicroscopy, scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive spectroscopy. Protein residue found on instruments was 21.5–54.0 μg and corrosion corresponded to 0–5% of the inspected area. No associations between storage environment and protein residue (adjusted mean difference = 0.48, 95% confidence interval: -0.42, 1.37, P=0.30) or corrosion (P=0.20) were identified. Higher numbers of treatment cycles showed higher amounts of corrosion (mean: 1cycle = 0.06%, 25cycles = 0.52% and 50cycles = 1.45%). In contrast, higher numbers of treatment cycles showed lower amounts of protein residue (P&lt;0.001). We found both lower protein residue concentration and lower corrosion rating at 12 h compared with 6 and 24 h holding time. Cleanliness and durability of instruments before reprocessing seems not to be affected by storage environment or holding time but instead by number of treatment cycles.</description><subject>Corrosion</subject><subject>Enterococcus faecalis ATCC 29212</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Microscopy, Electron, Scanning</subject><subject>o-Phthalaldehyde</subject><subject>Patient Safety</subject><subject>Protein residue</subject><subject>Reprocessing</subject><subject>Storage environment</subject><subject>Surgical Instruments</subject><issn>0195-6701</issn><issn>1532-2939</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE9r3DAQxUVpaTZJv0APRcdcvJHkyJYgEMrS_IFALs1ZjKXRRostbyU7kGs-eWU2KTkVBoRm3vsx8wj5ztmaM96c79a7pxDXggmxZryU-ERWXNaiErrWn8mKcS2rpmX8iBznvGOMlb78So5qydpWMbUirxuIFOjTPARH8zQm2CLF-BzSGAeMEx09zXPaBgs9DTFPaV7amXbox4Q04T6NFnMOcVvmNiFkpHuYwmLO4HF6oRAddXOCLvShfAvyA-nqlHzx0Gf89vaekMfrX783t9X9w83d5ud9ZWvJpwqhA-fdhddCS2DKtyi9sy2X3loGyoIHZEpJITp0yksNyqMGrbvWuobVJ-TswC0b_5kxT2YI2WLfQ8RxzkY0QujmolaySMVBatOYc0Jv9ikMkF4MZ2bJ3uzMkr1ZsjeMlxLF9OONP3cDun-W97CL4PIgwHLlc8Bksi0xWXQhoZ2MG8P_-H8BT4eang</recordid><startdate>202204</startdate><enddate>202204</enddate><creator>Rubak, P.</creator><creator>Lorenzen, J.</creator><creator>Ripadal, K.</creator><creator>Christensen, A-E.</creator><creator>Aaen, D.</creator><creator>Nielsen, H.L.</creator><creator>Bundgaard, K.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202204</creationdate><title>Can a humid storage environment of surgical instruments before reprocessing increase patient safety and durability of instruments?</title><author>Rubak, P. ; Lorenzen, J. ; Ripadal, K. ; Christensen, A-E. ; Aaen, D. ; Nielsen, H.L. ; Bundgaard, K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-eabadfd4f9295a08f7e5fdc715fcc0a8cafae088522bed8f59a8fe9a99b7cd603</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Corrosion</topic><topic>Enterococcus faecalis ATCC 29212</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Microscopy, Electron, Scanning</topic><topic>o-Phthalaldehyde</topic><topic>Patient Safety</topic><topic>Protein residue</topic><topic>Reprocessing</topic><topic>Storage environment</topic><topic>Surgical Instruments</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rubak, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lorenzen, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ripadal, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Christensen, A-E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aaen, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nielsen, H.L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bundgaard, K.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of hospital infection</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rubak, P.</au><au>Lorenzen, J.</au><au>Ripadal, K.</au><au>Christensen, A-E.</au><au>Aaen, D.</au><au>Nielsen, H.L.</au><au>Bundgaard, K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Can a humid storage environment of surgical instruments before reprocessing increase patient safety and durability of instruments?</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of hospital infection</jtitle><addtitle>J Hosp Infect</addtitle><date>2022-04</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>122</volume><spage>64</spage><epage>71</epage><pages>64-71</pages><issn>0195-6701</issn><eissn>1532-2939</eissn><abstract>National and international guidelines recommend reprocessing of medical instruments to commence as soon as possible post-surgery; furthermore, they recommend that transport and storage of surgical instruments postoperatively occurs in a moist, humid atmosphere. The concern is that a dry storage environment results in deterioration of instruments. To evaluate whether residual protein or corrosion is associated with storage environment (dry or humid), holding time or number of treatment cycles. The range of protein residue and corrosion were tested on surgical instruments contaminated with human blood amended Enterococcus faecalis ATCC 29212. Subsequently instruments were stored for 6, 12 and 24 h in dry or humid conditions. After one, 25 and 50 reprocessing cycles, instruments were examined for protein residues using the o-phthaldialdehyde (OPA) method or corrosion using stereomicroscopy, scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive spectroscopy. Protein residue found on instruments was 21.5–54.0 μg and corrosion corresponded to 0–5% of the inspected area. No associations between storage environment and protein residue (adjusted mean difference = 0.48, 95% confidence interval: -0.42, 1.37, P=0.30) or corrosion (P=0.20) were identified. Higher numbers of treatment cycles showed higher amounts of corrosion (mean: 1cycle = 0.06%, 25cycles = 0.52% and 50cycles = 1.45%). In contrast, higher numbers of treatment cycles showed lower amounts of protein residue (P&lt;0.001). We found both lower protein residue concentration and lower corrosion rating at 12 h compared with 6 and 24 h holding time. Cleanliness and durability of instruments before reprocessing seems not to be affected by storage environment or holding time but instead by number of treatment cycles.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>35077808</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jhin.2022.01.012</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0195-6701
ispartof The Journal of hospital infection, 2022-04, Vol.122, p.64-71
issn 0195-6701
1532-2939
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2622964385
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Corrosion
Enterococcus faecalis ATCC 29212
Humans
Microscopy, Electron, Scanning
o-Phthalaldehyde
Patient Safety
Protein residue
Reprocessing
Storage environment
Surgical Instruments
title Can a humid storage environment of surgical instruments before reprocessing increase patient safety and durability of instruments?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-18T04%3A47%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Can%20a%20humid%20storage%20environment%20of%20surgical%20instruments%20before%20reprocessing%20increase%20patient%20safety%20and%20durability%20of%20instruments?&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20hospital%20infection&rft.au=Rubak,%20P.&rft.date=2022-04&rft.volume=122&rft.spage=64&rft.epage=71&rft.pages=64-71&rft.issn=0195-6701&rft.eissn=1532-2939&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jhin.2022.01.012&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2622964385%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2622964385&rft_id=info:pmid/35077808&rft_els_id=S0195670122000275&rfr_iscdi=true