中华口腔医学研究杂志（电子版）
中華口腔醫學研究雜誌（電子版）
중화구강의학연구잡지（전자판）
Chinese Journal of Stomatological Research (Electronic Edition)
2015年
5期
417-419
,共3页
陈悦娜%李孟欢%林丽婷%张雪玲%古佩明%戚维舒
陳悅娜%李孟歡%林麗婷%張雪玲%古珮明%慼維舒
진열나%리맹환%림려정%장설령%고패명%척유서
口腔综合治疗台%交叉感染%消毒%避污
口腔綜閤治療檯%交扠感染%消毒%避汙
구강종합치료태%교차감염%소독%피오
Dental unit%Cross infection%Sterilization%Disposable cover
目的：探讨控制口腔综合治疗台（DU）手接触部位交叉感染的有效措施。方法抽取门诊DU 10张，随机分为实验组和对照组，每组各5张。实验组采用消毒避污法，对照组采用擦拭消毒法控制交叉感染。每组牙椅控感前后各随机采样30次，比较两组控感前后细菌菌落数和操作时间、成本核算的差异。结果两种措施均能有效控制交叉感染，两组间控感前菌落数（t=-0.775， P=0.338）、控感后菌落数（t=0.383，P=0.845）、成本核算（t=-1.726，P=0.421）间差异均无统计学意义。但实验组操作时间明显比对照组长，差异有统计学意义（t=24.190，P=0.000）。结论消毒避污法和擦拭消毒法均能有效控制DU手接触部位交叉感染，消毒避污法能减少消毒剂气溶胶对空气的二次污染，擦拭消毒法更快捷省时。
目的：探討控製口腔綜閤治療檯（DU）手接觸部位交扠感染的有效措施。方法抽取門診DU 10張，隨機分為實驗組和對照組，每組各5張。實驗組採用消毒避汙法，對照組採用抆拭消毒法控製交扠感染。每組牙椅控感前後各隨機採樣30次，比較兩組控感前後細菌菌落數和操作時間、成本覈算的差異。結果兩種措施均能有效控製交扠感染，兩組間控感前菌落數（t=-0.775， P=0.338）、控感後菌落數（t=0.383，P=0.845）、成本覈算（t=-1.726，P=0.421）間差異均無統計學意義。但實驗組操作時間明顯比對照組長，差異有統計學意義（t=24.190，P=0.000）。結論消毒避汙法和抆拭消毒法均能有效控製DU手接觸部位交扠感染，消毒避汙法能減少消毒劑氣溶膠對空氣的二次汙染，抆拭消毒法更快捷省時。
목적：탐토공제구강종합치료태（DU）수접촉부위교차감염적유효조시。방법추취문진DU 10장，수궤분위실험조화대조조，매조각5장。실험조채용소독피오법，대조조채용찰식소독법공제교차감염。매조아의공감전후각수궤채양30차，비교량조공감전후세균균락수화조작시간、성본핵산적차이。결과량충조시균능유효공제교차감염，량조간공감전균락수（t=-0.775， P=0.338）、공감후균락수（t=0.383，P=0.845）、성본핵산（t=-1.726，P=0.421）간차이균무통계학의의。단실험조조작시간명현비대조조장，차이유통계학의의（t=24.190，P=0.000）。결론소독피오법화찰식소독법균능유효공제DU수접촉부위교차감염，소독피오법능감소소독제기용효대공기적이차오염，찰식소독법경쾌첩성시。
Objective To investigate the effective methods in controlling cross infection of the hand contact area of dental units. Methods Ten dental units are randomly selected in outpatient department. The dental units are randomly divided into an experiment group and a control group,and each group has 5 chairs. Sterilization and disposable covers are used in the experiment group. Sterilization only is used in control group. Thirty samples are randomly taken in each group before and after infection control. The difference of bacteria colony number,operation time and cost effectiveness are compared between 2 groups before and after infection control. Results Both methods can effectively control cross infection. The comparisons between control group and test group in bacteria colony number before cross infection control(t=-0.775,P=0.338),bacteria colony number after cross infection control(t=0.383,P=0.845) and cost accounting (t =-1.726,P = 0.421) were not statistically significant. The operation time of experiment group is longer than the control group(t=24.190,P=0.000),and it′s of statistical difference. Conclusions Both methods can control the cross infection in the hand contact area of dental units. Sterilization and disposable covers method can reduce the secondary pollution of aerosol. The sterilization method is more time saving and more convenient.
