应用ATP生物荧光法监测评价腹腔镜器械的清洗效果  

Supervision and evaluation on cleaning effects of ATP bioluminescence technology for laparoscopic instruments

作　　者：胡玉蕾 孙建玲[2] 王清妍 韩月欣 王焕娟 田祥燕 HU Yu-lei;SUN Jian-ling;WANG Qing-yan;HAN Yue-xin;WANG Huan-juan;TIAN Xiang-yan(Qingdao Jiaozhou Central Hospital,Shandong266300,China;不详)

机构地区：[1]青岛市胶州中心医院,山东266300 [2]青岛大学附属医院

出　　处：《医学动物防制》2021年第3期257-260,共4页Journal of Medical Pest Control

基　　金：青岛市医药科研指导计划项目(2015—WJZD080)。

摘　　要：目的评价两种不同清洗方法对腹腔镜器械的清洗效果。方法选择2018年4月-2018年9月期间用后的腹腔镜器械为研究对象,共800件,随机分成观察组和对照组,每组400件,对照组采用传统手工清洗的方法,观察组采用手工加全自动清洗消毒器清洗的方法,比较两组的清洗效果。结果分别采用裸眼目测法、带光源(5倍)放大镜目测法和ATP生物荧光法比较两组器械直剪刀、分离钳、穿刺器、转换器的清洗质量,器械清洗合格率观察组均明显高于对照组。裸眼目测法器械清洗合格率对照组为90.25%,观察组为99.00%,差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=8.08,P<0.01;χ^(2)=6.66,P<0.01;χ^(2)=10.53,P<0.01;χ^(2)=5.67,P<0.05),带光源(5倍)放大镜目测法器械清洗合格率对照组为86.75%,观察组为97.50%,差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=7.79,P<0.01;χ^(2)=11.49,P<0.01;χ^(2)=6.79,P<0.01;χ^(2)=6.11,P<0.05),ATP生物荧光法器械清洗合格率对照组为83.00%,观察组为95.00%,差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=6.74,P<0.01;χ^(2)=8.30,P<0.01;χ^(2)=9.07,P<0.01;χ^(2)=6.37,P<0.05)。结论手工加全自动清洗消毒器清洗用后的腹腔镜器械合格率明显高于传统手工清洗法,ATP生物荧光法监测清洗后腹腔镜器械具有良好的可行性。Objective To evaluate the cleaning effects of two different cleaning methods for laparoscopic instruments.Methods Eight hundred sets of used laparoscopic instruments from April 2018 to September 2018 were selected as study subjects and randomly divided into the observation group and control group.And there are 400 sets for every group.Traditional manual cleaning was implemented for the control group;and automatic cleaning sterilizer was also used for the observation group on the basis of manual cleaning,and cleaning effects on two groups were compared.Results The cleaning quality for straight scissors,separating forceps,puncture outfits and converters of two groups were compared with such indexes of the control group by naked-eye ocular estimate,magnifying glass ocular estimate with light source(5 folds) and ATP biolfluorescence method respectively.The pass percent of cleanliness of instruments in the observation group was significantly higher than that of patients in the control group.The pass percent of the control group with the naked-eye ocular estimate was 90.25%,that of patients in the observation group was 99.00%,and the differences were statistically significant(χ^(2)=8.08,P<0.01;χ^(2)=6.66,P<0.01;χ^(2)=10.53,P<0.01;χ^(2)=5.67,P<0.05);the pass percent of control group evaluated with magnifying glass ocular estimate with light source(5 times) was 86.75%,such index of patients in the observation group was 97.50%,and the differences were statistically significant(χ^(2)=7.79,P<0.01;χ^(2)=11.49,P<0.01;χ^(2)=6.79,P<0.01;χ^(2)=6.11,P<0.05).The pass percent of the control group evaluated with the ATP bioluminescence technology was 83.00%,such index of the observation group was 95.00%,and the differences were statistically significant(χ^(2)=6.74,P<0.01;χ^(2)=8.30,P<0.01;χ^(2)=9.07,P<0.01;χ^(2)=6.37,P<0.05).Conclusion The pass percent for cleaning of used laparoscopic instruments with the method of combination of manual and full-automatic cleaning sterilizer is obviously higher than that of traditional

关 键 词：ATP生物荧光法 腹腔镜 医疗器械 清洗质量 评价 

分 类 号：R472.1[医药卫生—护理学]