论文部分内容阅读
目的比较腔镜手术器械等离子消毒的效果,选择最佳安全、快速无毒的内镜灭菌方法。方法术后腔镜器械采用不同的消毒灭菌方法606次,随机分为等离子消毒组(P组319次)与2%戊二醛浸泡消毒组(G组287次),两组消毒前清洗器械方法相同,消毒后比较两种消毒方法灭菌效果、消毒时间、腔镜器械损伤及使用过程对医务人员不良反应情况。观察术后伤口感染、延迟愈合等并发症。结果两组灭菌效果无明显差异(P>0.05)。灭菌时间及对医务人员不良反应发生率P组少于G组(P<0.05)。P组有1件器械出现轻度脱色,G组有2件器械出现不同程度的表面粗糙等现象,两组比较有统计学意义(P<0.05),并明显减轻医护人员工作量及器械污染。术后患者G组1例黏膜灼伤,伤口延迟愈合;P组未见不良反应的发生。结论过氧化氢低温等离子消毒腔镜手术器械灭菌效果安全可靠、术后无伤口感染,缩短连台手术时间,器械损伤小;避免了医务人员不良反应的发生。
Objective To compare the effect of endoscopic surgical instruments plasma sterilization, choose the best safe, rapid and non-toxic endoscopic sterilization method. Methods Postoperative endoscopic instruments were sterilized 606 times using different methods of disinfection and sterilization. They were randomly divided into plasma disinfection group (P group 319 times) and 2% glutaraldehyde disinfection group (G group 287 times) The same method, after disinfection of two sterilization methods compared sterilization, disinfection time, endoscopic instrument damage and use of medical personnel adverse reactions. Postoperative wound infection, delayed healing and other complications were observed. Results There was no significant difference in sterilization effect between the two groups (P> 0.05). Sterilization time and adverse reactions to medical staff P group less than G group (P <0.05). There was a slight discoloration of one instrument in group P, two different appearances of surface roughness in two instruments in group G, which were statistically significant (P <0.05), and significantly reduced the workload of medical staff and instrument contamination. Postoperative patients in group G mucosal burns, delayed wound healing; P group no adverse reactions. Conclusion The sterilizing effect of hydrogen peroxide low temperature plasma sterilizing endoscopic instruments is safe and reliable. No postoperative wound infection and shortening the time of continuous operation and equipment damage are avoided. Adverse reactions of medical staff are avoided.