Study on the cleaning effects of different cleaning methods on reused electrocoagulation hooks in laparoscopic surgery

Xue'er Peng; Lihua Huang; Jiao Liu; Chenguang Li; Haozhi Zhu; Huan Li; Aiqin Chen

doi:10.11910/j.issn.2791-2043.2023.4.05

Your Location：

Home >

Browse articles >

Study on the cleaning effects of different cleaning methods on reused electrocoagulation hooks in laparoscopic surgery

MONOGRAPHIC STUDY | Updated：2024-02-05

- Study on the cleaning effects of different cleaning methods on reused electrocoagulation hooks in laparoscopic surgery
- Sterile Supply Vol. 2, Issue 4, (2023)
- Affiliations：
  
  State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou 510060, P. R. China
- Author bio：
  
  Huan Li, Email: lihuan@sysucc.org.cn
  Aiqin Chen, Email: chenaq@sysucc.org.cn
- Funds：
- DOI：10.11910/j.issn.2791-2043.2023.4.05
  CLC：
Scan for full text
Peng Xue'er,Huang Lihua,Liu Jiao,et al.Study on the cleaning effects of different cleaning methods on reused electrocoagulation hooks in laparoscopic surgery[J].Sterile Supply,2023,02(04):190-194.
DOI：

Peng Xue'er,Huang Lihua,Liu Jiao,et al.Study on the cleaning effects of different cleaning methods on reused electrocoagulation hooks in laparoscopic surgery[J].Sterile Supply,2023,02(04):190-194. DOI： 10.11910/j.issn.2791-2043.2023.4.05.

摘要

Abstract

Purpose,2,This study aims to compare the preprocessing and cleaning efficacy of various methods, including manual and mechanical cleaning, on reused surgical electrocoagulation hooks (referred to as "electrocoagulation hooks"). Additionally, it seeks to investigate the optimal preprocessing and cleaning approaches for these hooks.,Method,2,A total of 235 electrocoagulation hooks utilized in laparoscopic surgeries at a specific medical institution from August 2021 to October 2022 were categorized into four groups: Control Group A and Experimental Groups B, C, and D. Control Group A underwent manual cleaning after pre-soaking with a medical alkaline cleaning agent. Experimental Group B underwent pre-soaking with a medical alkaline cleaning agent; Experimental Group C underwent pre-soaking with a 3% hydrogen peroxide solution, and Experimental Group D underwent pre-spraying with an instant foam-type preprocessing enzyme moisturizer. Subsequently, manual brushing followed by mechanical cleaning using a vacuum boiling washer was employed in the three experimental groups. The cleaning quality of electrocoagulation hooks in Control Group A and Experimental Groups B, C, and D was visually assessed using a lighted 4x magnifying glass, and the cleaning pass rates for each group were recorded. The Bonferroni correction was used for multiple test correction.,Results,2,In Group A, 58 observed electrocoagulation hooks underwent 34 qualified cleanings, resulting in a cleaning pass rate of 58.62%. For Group B, 52 observed electrocoagulation hooks achieved 47 qualified cleanings, with a cleaning pass rate of 90.38%. Group C, comprising 58 observed electrocoagulation hooks, demonstrated 48 qualified cleanings, yielding a cleaning pass rate of 82.75%. Finally, in Group D, 67 observed electrocoagulation hooks attained 64 qualified cleanings, resulting in a cleaning pass rate of 95.52%. Following chi-square tests and pairwise comparisons, Group B exhibited a significantly higher cleaning qualified rate than Group A (,χ,2,=14.250,P,<,0.001). However, no significant differences were observed in cleaning qualified rates among Groups B, C, and D (,χ,2,=5.569,P,=0.062), and pairwise comparisons also revealed no statistical differences (,P,>,0.0167).,Conclusion,2,The cleaning efficacy of vacuum boiling washing on electrocoagulation hooks post-laparoscopic surgery surpasses that of manual cleaning. Prior to employing the vacuum boiling washer, preprocessing with a medical alkaline cleaning agent pre-soaking, 3% hydrogen peroxide solution pre-soaking, and enzyme moisturizer pre-spraying all yielded comparable cleaning qualified rates, achieving effective cleaning outcomes. The selection of the cleaning method can be based on practical considerations.

关键词

Keywords

electrocoagulation hooksmanual cleaningvacuum boiling washingpreprocessingelectro-surgical instruments

references

HAMMES F, GOLDSCHMIDT F, VITAL M, et al. Measurement and interpretation of microbial adenosine tri-phosphate (ATP) in aquatic environments[J]. Water Res, 2010, 44(13): 3915-3923.

SPRUCE L. Back to basics: instrument cleaning[J]. AORN J, 2017, 105(3): 292-299.

Cuizhong Lin, Yanqiong Jiang, Yueh-Ling Yang. Comparison of the effects of two cleaning methods for luminal instruments[J]. Journal of Nursing, 2017,32(24):48-49.

QIN Lei, CHANG Xiaoxiao, LIANG Youping, et al. A survey on the current status of cleaning and sterilization packaging of ophthalmic microsurgical instruments in 170 hospitals[J]. Chinese Journal of Nursing, 2019,54(4):554-557.

Liu Suju, Wang Jun. Analysis of reasons affecting the cleaning quality of reusable surgical instruments and countermeasures[J]. Chinese Journal of Sterilization, 2016(1):96-97.

Xu Q. The effect of washing medical devices by automatic cleaner and sterilizer and ultrasonic cleaner[J]. Medical Equipment, 2018,31(5):75-76.

CHEN Y H, YI L Y, HU J, et al. Factors associated with deficiencies in packaging of surgical instrument by staff at a single center in China[J]. BMC Health Serv Res, 2022, 22(1): 660.

First Hospital of Peking University, Institute of Hospital Management of National Health and Family Planning Commission, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, et al. Hospital disinfection and supply center Part 3: Standards for monitoring the effectiveness of cleaning, disinfection and sterilization [S]. National Health and Family Planning Commission of the People’s Republic of China, 2016.

Yanni Wu, Ruoyi Liao, Zhifang Ding, et al. Evaluation of the effectiveness of fully automated cleaning and disinfecting machines for handling reusable cleaning brushes[J]. Chinese Journal of Sterilization, 2022,39(08):584-586.

EVANGELISTA S S, GUIMARAES N R, GARCIA N B, et al. Effectiveness of manual versus automated cleaning on Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilm removal from the surface of surgical instruments[J]. Am J Infect Control, 2020, 48(3): 267-274.

BAO M M, XIA Z H, ZHANG H X, et al. Study of detergents and cleaning time effect on the cleaning of endoscopes[J]. Chin J Nosocomiology, 2014, 24(19): 4918-4919, 4922.

SHI M, SONG J, SHEN C X, et al. Study on the effect of different pretreatment methods on the cleaning effect of rigid endoscopes[J]. Chin J Disinfect, 2021, 38(9): 647-650.

YI Jian-Ping, ZHANG Zheng-Tao, TAN Chun-Mei, et al. Comparison of the effects of different media pre-soaking cleaning methods in energy instrument cleaning[J]. Hebei Medicine, 2023,45(20):3132-3135.

LIU Mingxiu, HUANG Xi, ZHOU Shaolian. Observation on the cleaning effect of bipolar electrocoagulation by hydrogen peroxide combined with alkaline detergent[J]. Chinese Journal of Sterilization,2023,40(09):701-703.

LI Aiqin,ZHANG Hanzhong,SUN Xueyinget al. Effect of foam-based pretreatment moisturizer on the quality of luminal instrument cleaning[J]. Chinese Journal of Hospital Infection,2022,32(02):317-320.

SHI An-Yun, KAO Feng-Xia, GAN Zhi-Lian, et al. Comparison of the effect of cleaning ophthalmic instruments by decompression boiling cleaning machine and traditional cleaning technology[J]. Journal of PLA Medical College, 2018,39(04):321-323.

Han J. Evaluation of the effect of negative pressure ultrasonic cleaning machine for cleaning complex instruments[J]. Qinghai Medical Journal, 2019,49(09):58-59.

Views

Downloads

CSCD

Alert me when the article has been cited

Submit

Tools

Publicity Resources

No data

Related Author

No data

Related Institution

No data

⁰