三种预处理方法对管腔类器械的清洗效果比较  

Comparison on the Effects of Three Kinds of Preprocessing Methods for Cleaning of Lumen Medical Instruments

作　　者：谢明秀[1] 

机构地区：[1]广东省南雄市中医院供应室,广东南雄512400

出　　处：《临床医学工程》2016年第3期276-277,共2页Clinical Medicine & Engineering

摘　　要：目的探讨管腔类器械清洗的最佳预处理方法。方法选择270件中度污染的管腔类器械,按不同预处理方法分为三组各90例:A组采用多酶清洗液浸泡10 min后清洗,B组采用含氯消毒剂浸泡30 min后采用多酶清洗液浸泡10 min再清洗,C组采用含氯消毒剂浸泡30 min后清洗。评价并比较三组的清洗效果。结果 1三组的清洗目测合格率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。2A组、B组的隐血试验结果显著优于C组(P<0.05);A组与B组比较无统计学差异(P>0.05)。3A组与B组的ATP试验腔内合格率显著高于C组(P<0.05),A组与B组比较无统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论管腔类器械采用多酶清洗液进行预处理的效果显著优于含氯消毒液,但二者联合应用并不能提高清洗效果,多酶清洗液可替代含氯消毒液用于清洗的预处理。Objective To explore the optimal preprocessing methods for cleaning of lumen medical instruments. Methods A total of270 pieces of moderately polluted lumen medical instruments were selected and divided into three groups. Group A was soaked with multi-enzyme cleaning solution for 10 min, group B was soaked with chlorine-containing disinfectant solution for 30 min and then soaked with multi-enzyme cleaning solution for 10 min, and group C was soaked with chlorine-containing disinfectant solution for 30 min. The cleaning effects of three groups were evaluated and compared. Results 1The visual qualified rates of three group had no statistical difference（P〉0.05）. 2The results of occult blood test of group A and group B were significantly better than that of group C（P〈0.05）, while group A had no statistical difference with group B（P〉0.05）. 3The intraluminal qualified rate of ATP test of group C was significantly lower than that of group A and group B（P〈0.05）, while group A had no statistical difference with group B（P〉0.05）. Conclusions Multi-enzyme cleaning solution for preprocessing of cleaning of lumen medical instruments has better efficacy than chlorine-containing disinfectant solution.It can replace chlorine-containing disinfectant solution for preprocessing, because the combination cannot improve the cleaning effect.

关 键 词：含氯消毒剂 多酶清洗液 管道器械 清洗效果 

分 类 号：R197.323[医药卫生—卫生事业管理]