Hoffmann, R. A wiki for the life sciences where authorship matters. Nature Genetics (2008)

Editor

Personal info

View

About

Terms

Javascript disabled

Please enable Javascript support in your browser to use this application.

Instructions on how to enable JavaScript on different browsers can be found here: http://www.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=23852.

[edit this page]

Fraser, V.J. et al.

A prospective randomized trial comparing manual and automated endoscope disinfection methods.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of endoscope disinfection using automated and manual systems. DESIGN: Prospective randomized trial. SETTING: A 1,000-bed tertiary care referral center. METHODS: All endoscopes underwent a three-stage decontamination process including brushing and cleaning with water and detergent, manual or automated disinfection with 2% glutaraldehyde, and 70% alcohol rinse with forced air drying. Cultures were obtained from endoscopes from both groups before and after alcohol rinse and then after overnight storage. RESULTS: Cultures from 8/30 (27%) automated and 11/30 (37%) manually disinfected (P = 0.58) endoscopes grew gram-negative bacteria and/or nontuberculous mycobacteria before the alcohol rinse. After alcohol rinse, 3 (10%) of 30 automated and 8 (27%) of 30 manually disinfected endoscopes remained contaminated (P = 0.28). Manually disinfected endoscopes were contaminated more frequently with coliform bacteria, whereas endoscopes undergoing automated disinfection were more frequently contaminated with nontuberculous mycobacteria, but the differences were not statistically significant. After alcohol rinse and forced air drying, there was no difference in contamination rates between freshly disinfected endoscopes and those stored overnight (7/30 (23%) versus 4/30 (13%), P = 0.50). Colonoscopes and duodenoscopes were contaminated more often than gastroscopes (P = 0.00001). CONCLUSION: The persistent endoscope contamination after manual and automated disinfection indicates the importance of developing more reliable and effective disinfection methods.[1]

References

A prospective randomized trial comparing manual and automated endoscope disinfection methods. Fraser, V.J., Zuckerman, G., Clouse, R.E., O'Rourke, S., Jones, M., Klasner, J., Murray, P. Infection control and hospital epidemiology : the official journal of the Society of Hospital Epidemiologists of America. (1993) [Pubmed]

Annotations and hyperlinks in this abstract are from individual authors of WikiGenes or automatically generated by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine. The abstract is from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenes Open Access Licence Privacy Policy Terms of Use apsburg

The world's first wiki where authorship really matters (Nature Genetics, 2008). Due credit and reputation for authors. Imagine a global collaborative knowledge base for original thoughts. Search thousands of articles and collaborate with scientists around the globe.