1959
DOI: 10.1001/jama.1959.73000210001009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Endotracheal Tube as a Source of Infection

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

1960
1960
1978
1978

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 7 publications
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although the storage of the clean circuits did not involve sterile packaging, decontamination procedure was apparently able to reduce the contamination of the circuits. This is in agreement with the results of other authors (Joseph, 1952;Stratford, Clark and Dixson, 1964;Mecks, Pembleton and Hench, 1967;Enright, Moore and Parney, 1976), who found a considerable contamination of the anaesthetic equipment after use; however, only slight contamination was found by Smith and Howland (1959). Furthermore, the bacterial content of the anaesthetic gas mixture from cleansed circuits (4.2 x 10~2 litre-1 ) was only 1.3 times greater than that in the gas supplied from the anaesthetic machine (3.5 x 10~2 bacteria litre-1 ) and considerably less than the bacterial content of normal hospital air from surgical and medical wards and operating theatres (21.2 x 10~2 to 85.8 x 10-2 bacteria litre" 1 (Siboni, I960)).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Although the storage of the clean circuits did not involve sterile packaging, decontamination procedure was apparently able to reduce the contamination of the circuits. This is in agreement with the results of other authors (Joseph, 1952;Stratford, Clark and Dixson, 1964;Mecks, Pembleton and Hench, 1967;Enright, Moore and Parney, 1976), who found a considerable contamination of the anaesthetic equipment after use; however, only slight contamination was found by Smith and Howland (1959). Furthermore, the bacterial content of the anaesthetic gas mixture from cleansed circuits (4.2 x 10~2 litre-1 ) was only 1.3 times greater than that in the gas supplied from the anaesthetic machine (3.5 x 10~2 bacteria litre-1 ) and considerably less than the bacterial content of normal hospital air from surgical and medical wards and operating theatres (21.2 x 10~2 to 85.8 x 10-2 bacteria litre" 1 (Siboni, I960)).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%