运用不同方法干燥金属管腔器械的效果比较  

Comparative study of different drying methods for metal lumen instruments

作　　者：蒋丽娟 黄琼辉[1] JIANG Lijuan;HUANG Qionghui(Central Sterile Supply Department,Xiangya Hospital Central South University,Changsha,Hunan,410008)

机构地区：[1]中南大学湘雅医院消毒供应中心

出　　处：《中西医结合护理（中英文）》2019年第8期91-93,共3页Journal of Clinical Nursing in Practice

摘　　要：目的对比运用不同方法干燥金属管腔器械的效果。方法将400件金属管腔器械(包括导向器、吸引器、导管等)平均分为2组,各200件。完成终末清洗后,在温度恒定条件下,用低纤维絮布将器械表面水分擦去,高温烘烤时间均为15min。对照组采用高温烘烤法进行干燥,温度设置为90℃,实验组运用压缩空气干燥法联合高温烘烤法进行干燥。比较2组干燥效果。结果采用目测法评估,实验组和对照组的干燥成功率分别为96.50%和82.00%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);采用压缩空气喷吹检测法评估,实验组和对照组的干燥成功率分别为94.00%和79.00%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论压缩空气干燥法联合高温烘烤法对金属管腔器械的干燥效果优于单独使用高温烘烤法。Objective To compare the drying effect of different drying methods for metal lumen instruments.Methods Totally 400 metal lumen instruments(guide apparatus,aspirators,catheters,etc.) were divided into two groups,with 20 pieces in each group.After the final cleaning,the moisture on the surface of the instruments was wiped off with low fiber floss under constant temperature,followed by 15 minutes of high-temperature drying process (temperature was set at 90 ℃).The experimental group used compressed air drying combine with high-temperature drying process.The drying effect of two methods was compared.Results Measured by visual observation,the drying success rate was 96.50% in the experimental group and 82.00% in the control group,with a significant difference (P<0.01).Measured by compressed air method,the drying success rate was 94.00% in experimental group and 79.00%in the control group,with a significant difference (P<0.01).Conclusion The combined method of compressed air drying and high-temperature shows a superior drying effect for metal lumen instruments.

关 键 词：压缩空气 高温 管腔器械 干燥 

分 类 号：R472.1[医药卫生—护理学]