Liquid sterilization versus high level disinfection in the urologic office.
OBJECTIVES: Systems are available for liquid sterilization (LS) and high level disinfection (HLD) of flexible cystoscopes. Guidelines from the Association of Operating Room Nurses and the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology recommend HLD for urologic endoscopic equipment. We examine these methods emphasizing costs, performance of procedure, and maintenance. METHODS: The process of LS using the Steris System 1 Processor (SSP1) was studied from June 1993 to June 1994. The Voluntary Hospital Association (VHA) Plus Glutaraldehyde HLD system was evaluated from July 1994 to July 1995. Costs are those incurred by the Ochsner Department of Urology over these same periods. RESULTS: Purchase of the SSP1 system proved costly: $16,200 for purchase; $8645 for accessories, service contract, and training seminars; and $5800 for unit installation. Two gallons of glutaraldehyde including the disinfection container cost $15.60. Since government regulation requires less than 0.2 ppm airborne glutaraldehyde concentration, some facilities may need to install ventilation systems. There were no clinical differences between the two systems. Yearly operating expenses in our department for SSP1 was $6037 compared to $445 for HLD. Mean length of time to process was 35 minutes per use for SSP1 and 20 minutes for HLD. Repair of seven cystoscopes during the SSP1 period cost $11,500. No repairs were required for the cystoscopes used during the HLD period. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient flexible cystoscopy was performed an average of 988 times per year during the study period. Major cost savings were incurred with institution of the HLD system and no endoscope repairs were necessary. There were no clinical differences between the two systems.[1]References
- Liquid sterilization versus high level disinfection in the urologic office. Fuselier, H.A., Mason, C. Urology (1997) [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 WikiGenesOpen Access LicencePrivacy PolicyTerms of Useapsburg
