Effects of disposable pull-through brush types for reprocessing of flexible endoscopes in clinical environment

IF 1.8 Q3 INFECTIOUS DISEASES Infection Prevention in Practice Pub Date : 2025-01-28 DOI:10.1016/j.infpip.2025.100445
Remus O. Anders , Adriana M. Airo , Eve Capistran , Anita Chin , Garry Bassi , Tony Mazzulli
{"title":"Effects of disposable pull-through brush types for reprocessing of flexible endoscopes in clinical environment","authors":"Remus O. Anders ,&nbsp;Adriana M. Airo ,&nbsp;Eve Capistran ,&nbsp;Anita Chin ,&nbsp;Garry Bassi ,&nbsp;Tony Mazzulli","doi":"10.1016/j.infpip.2025.100445","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Evaluating the effectiveness of different brush types used during the cleaning and reprocessing of flexible endoscopes is challenging. This study compared the yield of microbial growth from endoscopes that had been used clinically before and after cleaning with different brush types (bristle, squeegee, and hybrid). Endoscopes used to perform a total of 91 medical procedures on 82 patients were included. Quantitative bacterial cultures yielded no statistical differences between the different brushes used. Colonoscopes and gastroscopes surveyed after rigorous cleaning steps resulted in a drop in colony counts between pre- and post-cleaning from 1.45E+8 (±5.21E+07) to 2.5 (±0.13) individual colonies suggesting that the overall cleaning process was effective regardless of the brush type used.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":33492,"journal":{"name":"Infection Prevention in Practice","volume":"7 1","pages":"Article 100445"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection Prevention in Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590088925000095","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Evaluating the effectiveness of different brush types used during the cleaning and reprocessing of flexible endoscopes is challenging. This study compared the yield of microbial growth from endoscopes that had been used clinically before and after cleaning with different brush types (bristle, squeegee, and hybrid). Endoscopes used to perform a total of 91 medical procedures on 82 patients were included. Quantitative bacterial cultures yielded no statistical differences between the different brushes used. Colonoscopes and gastroscopes surveyed after rigorous cleaning steps resulted in a drop in colony counts between pre- and post-cleaning from 1.45E+8 (±5.21E+07) to 2.5 (±0.13) individual colonies suggesting that the overall cleaning process was effective regardless of the brush type used.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Infection Prevention in Practice
Infection Prevention in Practice Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
审稿时长
61 days
期刊最新文献
Effects of disposable pull-through brush types for reprocessing of flexible endoscopes in clinical environment Sodium dichloroisocyanurate: a promising candidate for the disinfection of resilient drain biofilm Clinical and economic impact of ventilator-associated pneumonia in intensive care units in Japan Healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitudes, and practices in preventing catheter-associated urinary tract infections: a cross-sectional study in a rehabilitation facility Surgical prophylaxis in Haydom Lutheran Hospital, Tanzania – learning from a point prevalence survey
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1