Open AccessAudit of Flexible Nasoendoscope Decontamination: Clinical Efficacy and Cost Effectiveness
Author(s) -
Phua Chu Qin,
Mahalingappa Yogesh,
Karagama Yakubu
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
otolaryngology–head and neck surgery
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.232
H-Index - 121
eISSN - 1097-6817
pISSN - 0194-5998
DOI - 10.1177/0194599811415823a40
Subject(s) - human decontamination , washer , chlorine dioxide , medicine , chemistry , inorganic chemistry , pathology
Objective There are various methods available for flexible nasoendoscope decontamination. Department of Health, United Kingdom, advocates the use of an automated washer, as it has the advantage of reducing errors resulting from variability of human practice. We aim to compare the efficacy and cost effectiveness of chlorine dioxide wipes versus the automated washer. Method The tip of a flexible nasoendoscope is immersed into a Staphylococcus epidermidis culture, with bacteriological swabs taken from the tip before immersion and after the process of decontamination with either chlorine dioxide wipes or automated wash. Bacteriological swabs are then checked for growth of STE. Cost calculation is performed. Results Postdecontamination, samples from chlorine dioxide wipes showed 2% (1 out of 50 swabs) growth of STE as opposed to 28% (14/50) from the automated wash. P =. 00. On a 10‐year cost calculation, the automated wash had a lower cost. Conclusion From the study, wipes are more efficacious in decontamination compared with the washer. However, the automated washer costs less. Further studies should also be performed on real patients to check the significance of improper decontamination and the actual risk of disease transmission.