Abbonarsi

Duodenoscope reprocessing practice patterns in U.S. endoscopy centers: a survey study - 16/07/18

Doi : 10.1016/j.gie.2018.04.2340 
Adarsh M. Thaker, MD 1, V. Raman Muthusamy, MD 1, Alireza Sedarat, MD 1, Rabindra R. Watson, MD 1, Michael L. Kochman, MD 2, Andrew S. Ross, MD 3, Stephen Kim, MD 1,
1 Vatche and Tamar Manoukian Division of Digestive Diseases, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 
2 Gastroenterology Division, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 
3 Digestive Disease Institute, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, USA 

Reprint requests: Stephen Kim, MD, 200 UCLA Medical Plaza, Suite 365, Los Angeles, CA 90095.200 UCLA Medical Plaza, Suite 365Los AngelesCA90095

Abstract

Background and Aims

After recent outbreaks of duodenoscope-related infections from multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO), the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommended implementing 1 or more of 4 enhanced reprocessing measures in addition to updated manual cleaning methods and high-level disinfection (HLD). The implementation of these techniques in endoscopy facilities and provider opinions regarding reprocessing priorities remain unknown.

Methods

Physicians, nurse managers, nurses, and infection control staff at endoscopy units performing ERCP in the United States were surveyed to assess current institutional practices and individual opinions regarding future reprocessing solutions.

Results

A total of 249 distinct institutions participated in the survey. Of these, 223 (89.6%) implemented at least 1 of the 4 supplemental reprocessing methods after MDRO outbreaks. Overall, 63% of centers used repeat HLD, 53% performed surveillance microbiological culturing, 35% used liquid chemical sterilization, and 12% used ethylene oxide sterilization. Thirty-seven centers (15%) routinely screened patients for MDRO. Forced-air drying after reprocessing was used by 47.8% of centers. Fifty percent of individual respondents, including 58.6% of physicians, believed that redesign of the duodenoscope is the best long-term reprocessing solution. The majority (55.1%) identified efficacy to be the single most important factor in selecting a reprocessing technique.

Conclusions

Although most endoscopy centers have implemented enhanced duodenoscope reprocessing techniques, there is a large variation in practice. Most providers believe that duodenoscope redesign and identifying reprocessing techniques with maximal efficacy are the long-term priorities. Improved adherence to forced-air drying in duodenoscope reprocessing is needed.

Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.

Abbreviations : AGA, ATP, CI, EtO, FDA, HLD, MDRO, OR, SRM


Mappa


 If you would like to chat with an author of this article, you may contact Dr Kim at stephenkim@mednet.ucla.edu.
 DISCLOSURE: The following authors disclosed financial relationships relevant to this publication: Dr Muthusamy; Consultant for Boston Scientific and Medvators; Dr Kochman: Consultant, BSC; Dark Canyon Laboratory; Ferring, Olympus; Spouse: Merck (employment, stock, options); Dr Kim; Consultant for Boston Scientific. All other authors disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication.


© 2018  American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Pubblicato da Elsevier Masson SAS. Tutti i diritti riservati.
Aggiungere alla mia biblioteca Togliere dalla mia biblioteca Stampare
Esportazione

    Citazioni Export

  • File

  • Contenuto

Vol 88 - N° 2

P. 316 - agosto 2018 Ritorno al numero
Articolo precedente Articolo precedente
  • Duodenoscope-related and echoendoscope-related infections: Is “never” possible?
  • Tyler M. Berzin, Joseph D. Feuerstein
| Articolo seguente Articolo seguente
  • Adherence to colorectal cancer screening measured as the proportion of time covered
  • Caitlin C. Murphy, Bianca M. Sigel, Edward Yang, Celette Sugg Skinner, Ethan A. Halm, Samir Gupta, Joanne M. Sanders, Katharine McCallister, Amit G. Singal

Benvenuto su EM|consulte, il riferimento dei professionisti della salute.
L'accesso al testo integrale di questo articolo richiede un abbonamento.

Già abbonato a @@106933@@ rivista ?

@@150455@@ Voir plus

Il mio account


Dichiarazione CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM è registrato presso la CNIL, dichiarazione n. 1286925.

Ai sensi della legge n. 78-17 del 6 gennaio 1978 sull'informatica, sui file e sulle libertà, Lei puo' esercitare i diritti di opposizione (art.26 della legge), di accesso (art.34 a 38 Legge), e di rettifica (art.36 della legge) per i dati che La riguardano. Lei puo' cosi chiedere che siano rettificati, compeltati, chiariti, aggiornati o cancellati i suoi dati personali inesati, incompleti, equivoci, obsoleti o la cui raccolta o di uso o di conservazione sono vietati.
Le informazioni relative ai visitatori del nostro sito, compresa la loro identità, sono confidenziali.
Il responsabile del sito si impegna sull'onore a rispettare le condizioni legali di confidenzialità applicabili in Francia e a non divulgare tali informazioni a terzi.


Tutto il contenuto di questo sito: Copyright © 2026 Elsevier, i suoi licenziatari e contributori. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. Inclusi diritti per estrazione di testo e di dati, addestramento dell’intelligenza artificiale, e tecnologie simili. Per tutto il contenuto ‘open access’ sono applicati i termini della licenza Creative Commons.