PDCA循环对于可复用器械集中消毒供应的管理效果研究  

Research on the Management Effect of PDCA Cycle on Centralized Disinfection and Supply of Reusable Instruments

作　　者：翁蓓彦 WENG Beiyan(Disinfection Supply Center,Changshu Second People's Hospital,Changshu,Jiangsu Province,215500 China)

机构地区：[1]常熟市第二人民医院消毒供应中心,江苏常熟215500

出　　处：《中国卫生产业》2022年第1期101-104,共4页China Health Industry

摘　　要：目的探讨对可复用器械集中消毒供应实施PDCA循环后对管理效果产生的影响。方法选取2019年1月—2020年12月在职的20名消毒供应中心人员进行可复用器械集中消毒供应管理研究,随机分为常规干预组(常规可复用器械集中消毒供应管理)和PDCA循环组(PDCA循环管理),每组10名。比较两组工作人员科室满意度、可复用器械集中消毒供应质量评分(包装质量评分、设备管理评分、消毒质量评分)以及灭菌质量合格情况(呼吸道管路、诊断器械、手术器械、其他物品)。结果PDCA循环组科室满意度(92.15±2.25)分高于常规干预组(80.13±3.12)分,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);PDCA循环组包装质量评分(91.29±5.25)分、设备管理评分(92.02±4.19)分、消毒质量评分(92.31±5.02)分均高于常规干预组包装质量评分(70.28±4.12)分、设备管理评分(71.56±5.29)分、消毒质量评分(72.25±5.55)分,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);抽取两组各200件样本数,对灭菌质量合格情况进行统计发现,PDCA循环组200件中,呼吸道管路合格192件,诊断器械合格190件,手术器械合格185件,其他物品合格185件;常规干预组200件中,呼吸道管路合格175件,诊断器械合格160件,手术器械合格161件,其他物品合格163件;PDCA循环组呼吸道管路合格率、诊断器械合格率、手术器械合格率以及其他物品合格率均高于常规干预组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论PDCA循环方式有效运用,观察工作人员科室满意度、可复用器械集中消毒供应质量评分(包装质量评分、设备管理评分、消毒质量评分)以及灭菌质量合格情况(呼吸道管路、诊断器械、手术器械、其他物品),提高程度显著,可促进可复用器械集中消毒供应整体管理效果的显著提升。Objective To investigate the effect of PDCA cycle on the management effect of centralized disinfection and supply of reusable instruments.Methods 20 staff of the disinfection supply center who were on the job from January 2019 to December 2020 were selected to conduct a research on the centralized disinfection supply management of reusable instruments.They were randomly divided into routine intervention group(centralized disinfection and supply management of conventional reusable instruments)and PDCA aycle group(PDCA circulation management),with 10 people in each group.The department satisfaction and the quality scores of the centralized disinfection and supply of reusable instruments(package quality score,equipment management score,and disinfection quality score)and the qualified sterilization quality(airway tubing,diagnostic instruments,surgical instruments,other items)were compared between the two groups.Results The department satisfaction score of PDCA cycle group(92.15±2.25)points was higher than that of routine intervention group(80.13±3.12)points,the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The PDCA cycle group scored(91.29±5.25)points for packaging quality,(92.02±4.19)points for equipment management,and(92.31±5.02)points for disinfection quality,which were higher than those of the routine intervention group(70.28±4.12)points,equipment management(71.56±5.29)points,and disinfection quality (72.25±5.55)points, the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). The number of samples of 200 pieces in each of the two groups was taken, and the statistics on the qualified sterilization quality showed that among the 200 pieces of the PDCA cycle group, 192 pieces of the respiratory tube were qualified, 190 pieces of diagnostic instruments were qualified, 185 pieces of surgical instruments were qualified, and other items were qualified 185 pieces. Among the 200 cases in the routine intervention group, 175 were qualified for airway tubes, 160 were qualified for diagnostic instruments, 161 were qual

关 键 词：可复用器械集中消毒供应 PDCA循环 科室满意度 供应质量评分 

分 类 号：R19[医药卫生—卫生事业管理]