Abstract
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.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.