护理学报
護理學報
호이학보
JOURNAL OF NURSING
2013年
14期
64-66
,共3页
压力蒸汽灭菌化学指示卡%灭菌质量判定%有效性
壓力蒸汽滅菌化學指示卡%滅菌質量判定%有效性
압력증기멸균화학지시잡%멸균질량판정%유효성
pressure steam sterilization chemical indicator card%sterilization quality%effectiveness
目的监测不同品牌压力蒸汽灭菌化学指示卡进行灭菌质量判定的有效性。方法选择4种不同品牌压力蒸汽灭菌化学指示卡,在确认脉动真空压力蒸汽灭菌器在正常灭菌程序,灭菌性能合格的前提下,模拟实验一组和实验二组为物理监测提示灭菌失效模式及对照组为正常灭菌状态模式进行化学指示卡监测与生物监测,并对监测结果进行比较分析。结果实验一组生物监测合格率为0,其中2种品牌压力蒸汽灭菌化学指示卡显示合格率为56%、67%;实验二组生物监测合格率为22%,其中2种品牌压力蒸汽灭菌化学指示卡显示合格率100%;对照组全部达到灭菌合格标准,与生物监测结果一致。结论在温度、时间、蒸汽压力、蒸汽饱和度不达标状况下,化学指示卡监测结果的有效性与生物监测结果存在差异。提示进行灭菌质量判定时不能仅凭化学监测结果,需要更关注物理监测参数和生物监测结果,以免因仅观察化学监测而造成最终结果合格的假象。
目的鑑測不同品牌壓力蒸汽滅菌化學指示卡進行滅菌質量判定的有效性。方法選擇4種不同品牌壓力蒸汽滅菌化學指示卡,在確認脈動真空壓力蒸汽滅菌器在正常滅菌程序,滅菌性能閤格的前提下,模擬實驗一組和實驗二組為物理鑑測提示滅菌失效模式及對照組為正常滅菌狀態模式進行化學指示卡鑑測與生物鑑測,併對鑑測結果進行比較分析。結果實驗一組生物鑑測閤格率為0,其中2種品牌壓力蒸汽滅菌化學指示卡顯示閤格率為56%、67%;實驗二組生物鑑測閤格率為22%,其中2種品牌壓力蒸汽滅菌化學指示卡顯示閤格率100%;對照組全部達到滅菌閤格標準,與生物鑑測結果一緻。結論在溫度、時間、蒸汽壓力、蒸汽飽和度不達標狀況下,化學指示卡鑑測結果的有效性與生物鑑測結果存在差異。提示進行滅菌質量判定時不能僅憑化學鑑測結果,需要更關註物理鑑測參數和生物鑑測結果,以免因僅觀察化學鑑測而造成最終結果閤格的假象。
목적감측불동품패압력증기멸균화학지시잡진행멸균질량판정적유효성。방법선택4충불동품패압력증기멸균화학지시잡,재학인맥동진공압력증기멸균기재정상멸균정서,멸균성능합격적전제하,모의실험일조화실험이조위물리감측제시멸균실효모식급대조조위정상멸균상태모식진행화학지시잡감측여생물감측,병대감측결과진행비교분석。결과실험일조생물감측합격솔위0,기중2충품패압력증기멸균화학지시잡현시합격솔위56%、67%;실험이조생물감측합격솔위22%,기중2충품패압력증기멸균화학지시잡현시합격솔100%;대조조전부체도멸균합격표준,여생물감측결과일치。결론재온도、시간、증기압력、증기포화도불체표상황하,화학지시잡감측결과적유효성여생물감측결과존재차이。제시진행멸균질량판정시불능부빙화학감측결과,수요경관주물리감측삼수화생물감측결과,이면인부관찰화학감측이조성최종결과합격적가상。
Objective To evaluate the effect of different brands of pressure steam sterilization chemical indicator cards on sterilization quality. Methods Based on the premise that the pulsation vacuum pressure steam sterilizer was in normal state and with qualified sterilization performance, involving four different brands of pressure steam sterilization chemical indicator cards, the study included two experiment groups with physical monitoring prompt indicating sterilization failure modes and control group with biological monitoring and monitoring with chemical indicator cards under normal sterilization condition, and the monitoring results were compared. Results In experiment group one, qualified rate of biological monitoring was 0, of which two brands of pressure steam sterilization chemical indicator cards showed the qualified rate were 56%, 67% respectively while in experiment group two, qualified rate of biological monitoring was 22%, of which two brands of pressure steam sterilization chemical indicator cards showed both the qualified rates were 100%; in control group, all the monitorings met sterilization qualified standard, which were consistent with biological monitoring. Conclusion Under the condition that time, temperature, steam pressure, steam saturation were not up to the standard conditions, there is a significant difference between the results of pressure steam sterilization chemical indicator card monitoring and biological monitoring. Sterilization quality is determined not only by the monitoring results of the chemical card, but by physical parameters and biological monitoring results.