CAJ | 학술논문

目的探讨紫外线灯管的使用寿命及更换灯管依据,以保证紫外线灯管辐照强度监测的准确性.方法采用移动式紫外线强度监测柜对40 W和20 W的紫外线灯管进行辐照强度监测作为实验组Ⅰ和实验组Ⅱ,采用实地拉杆式垂直监测和生物安全柜内垂直监测的数据作为对照组Ⅰ和对照组Ⅱ,比较两种监测方法紫外线灯管辐照强度变化;将正在使用中的紫外线灯管,累计使用时间＞1 000 h的设为实验组Ⅲ,累计使用时间＜1 000 h的设为对照组Ⅲ,在标准状态下并在紫外线强度监测柜中检测,分别记录每只灯管的累计使用时间及辐照强度和合格率;选取同一房间的所有紫外线灯管都＞1 000 h且无更换记录的作为实验组Ⅳ,＜1 000 h且无更换记录的房间为对照组Ⅳ,进行紫外线消毒前后空气采样,分别记录检测的细菌菌落总数,观察两组灯管紫外线消毒效果.结果实验组Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ组辐照强度与对照组Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ组比较差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05);两组灯管合格率比较,差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);实验组Ⅳ紫外线消毒后细菌平均杀灭率为86.4%,对照组Ⅳ的平均杀灭率为85.7%,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论使用紫外线强度监测柜监测紫外线辐照强度准确、实用.不能将累计使用时间＞1 000 h作为判断紫外线灯管的使用寿命而更换灯管的依据,应定期监测紫外线灯管的辐照强度,不合格者作为更换灯管的依据.
목적 탐토자외선등관적사용수명급경환등관의거,이보증자외선등관복조강도감측적준학성.방법 채용이동식자외선강도감측거대40 W화20 W적자외선등관진행복조강도감측작위실험조Ⅰ화실험조Ⅱ,채용실지랍간식수직감측화생물안전거내수직감측적수거작위대조조Ⅰ화대조조Ⅱ,비교량충감측방법자외선등관복조강도변화;장정재사용중적자외선등관,루계사용시간＞1 000 h적설위실험조Ⅲ,루계사용시간＜1 000 h적설위대조조Ⅲ,재표준상태하병재자외선강도감측거중검측,분별기록매지등관적루계사용시간급복조강도화합격솔;선취동일방간적소유자외선등관도＞1 000 h차무경환기록적작위실험조Ⅳ,＜1 000 h차무경환기록적방간위대조조Ⅳ,진행자외선소독전후공기채양,분별기록검측적세균균락총수,관찰량조등관자외선소독효과.결과 실험조Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ조복조강도여대조조Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ조비교차이균유통계학의의(P＜0.05);량조등관합격솔비교,차이무통계학의의(P＞0.05);실험조Ⅳ자외선소독후세균평균살멸솔위86.4%,대조조Ⅳ적평균살멸솔위85.7%,량조비교차이무통계학의의(P＞0.05).결론 사용자외선강도감측거감측자외선복조강도준학、실용.불능장루계사용시간＞1 000 h작위판단자외선등관적사용수명이경환등관적의거,응정기감측자외선등관적복조강도,불합격자작위경환등관적의거.
Objective To explore the basis on ultraviolet lamp life and bulbs replacement and to ensure ultraviolet lamp irradiation monitoring accuracy. Methods The mobile UV intensity monitoring counters were used to monitor the ultraviolet lamp of 40 W and 20 W as test Ⅰ and test Ⅱ group, and the vertical monitoring data of vertical monitoring and on-the-spot bio-safety cabinet were used as control Ⅰ and control Ⅱ group. The two fluorescent UV irradiation monitoring methods were compared. The total use time of ultraviolet ray tube was more than 1 ,000 hours was defined as test Ⅲ group, less than 1 000 hours was defined as control Ⅲ group.Under standard condition, and ultraviolet intensity in the chest, record the monitor each time and the accumulative used fluorescent intensity and rate irradiation. The same room where all ultraviolet lamp are more than 1 000 hours without changing was recorded as test Ⅳ group, less than 1000 hours without changing was recorded as control Ⅳ group, The two groups were used with ultraviolet disinfection, bacterial colonies were recorded and disinfection effect was compared between the groups. Results Compared with three control groups, UV intensity in three testing groups were significantly higher (P ＜0. 05), but not the tube qualified rate (P ＞0.05). The average rate of bacteria kill in test group Ⅳ after the ultraviolet disinfection was 86.4% and the control group Ⅳ was 85.7%, the difference was not statistically significant (P ＞ 0. 05). Conclusions It was accurate and practical to use UV intensity monitoring counters. Total time more than 1 000 hours cannot used as judging basis for bulbs replacement. We should monitor ultraviolet radiation intensity of tube periodically and replace the unqualified bulbs.