Duodenoscope hang time does not correlate with risk of bacterial contamination - 18/04/17
Highlights |
• | Current guidelines recommend a maximum hang time for duodenoscopes of 5-14 days. |
• | Among 465 cultures, 34 followed a hang time ≥7 days; 431 occurred within 7 days. |
• | The maximum hang time was 40 days; 12 cultures revealed significant contamination. |
• | Prolonged hang time was not associated with a higher likelihood of contamination. |
Abstract |
Background |
Current professional guidelines recommend a maximum hang time for reprocessed duodenoscopes of 5-14 days. We sought to study the association between hang time and risk of duodenoscope contamination.
Methods |
We analyzed cultures of the elevator mechanism and working channel collected in a highly standardized fashion just before duodenoscope use. Hang time was calculated as the time from reprocessing to duodenoscope sampling. The relationship between hang time and duodenoscope contamination was estimated using a calculated correlation coefficient between hang time in days and degree of contamination on the elevator mechanism and working channel.
Results |
The 18 study duodenoscopes were cultured 531 times, including 465 (87.6%) in the analysis dataset. Hang time ranged from 0.07-39.93 days, including 34 (7.3%) with hang time ≥7.00 days. Twelve cultures (2.6%) demonstrated elevator mechanism and/or working channel contamination. The correlation coefficients for hang time and degree of duodenoscope contamination were very small and not statistically significant (−0.0090 [P = .85] for elevator mechanism and −0.0002 [P = 1.00] for working channel). Odds ratios for hang time (dichotomized at ≥7.00 days) and elevator mechanism and/or working channel contamination were not significant.
Conclusions |
We did not find a significant association between hang time and risk of duodenoscope contamination. Future guidelines should consider a recommendation of no limit for hang time.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Key Words : ERCP, Endoscope, Environmental contamination, Disinfection
Plan
| Funded in part by an investigator-initiated grant from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (MS, EBH, and GMS) and with support from the study institution. |
|
| Conflicts of interest: None to report. |
Vol 45 - N° 4
P. 360-364 - avril 2017 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Methodology for analyzing environmental quality indicators in a dynamic operating room environment
- Thomas Gormley, Troy A. Markel, Howard W. Jones, Jennifer Wagner, Damon Greeley, James H. Clarke, Mark Abkowitz, John Ostojic
- The value of participatory development to support antimicrobial stewardship with a clinical decision support system
- Nienke Beerlage-de Jong, Jobke Wentzel, Ron Hendrix, Lisette van Gemert-Pijnen
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?