Recent advances in the cleaning and disinfection of fibrescopes

Babb, J.R.; Bradley, Christina; Deverill, C.E.A.; Ayliffe, G.A.J.; Melikian, V.

doi:10.1016/0195-6701(81)90065-7

Cited by 43 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Short term personal and static samples were collected during the activities likely to produce peak levels of glutaraldehyde vapour ("worst case" work exposures) -for example, pouring used solution into a sluice or sink, activating and decanting fresh solution into disinfection tanks. Samples were collected over a period of 20 minutes or less, the sampling period being determined by the time required for the operator to complete the pertinent tasks, typically [10][11][12][13][14][15] minutes. Long term samples were collected over sampling periods ranging from 34 to 120 minutes during a theatre list when exposure was intermittent.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Occupational asthma due to glutaraldehyde and formaldehyde in endoscopy and x ray departments.

Gannon

Bright

Campbell

et al. 1995

Thorax

144

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background -Glutaraldehyde is the best disinfectant for fibreoptic endoscopes. It is also used in the processing ofx ray films. A number of studies have reported eye, nose, and respiratory symptoms in exposed workers. Three individual case reports ofoccupational asthma in endoscopy workers and a radiographer have also been published. We describe a further seven cases ofoccupational asthma due to glutaraldehyde in endoscopy and x ray departments, together with exposure levels measured during the challenge tests and in 19 endoscopy and x ray departments in the region. Methods -Eight workers were referred for investigation ofsuspected occupational asthma following direct or indirect exposure to glutaraldehyde at work. They were investigated by serial measurements of peak expiratory flow (PEF) and specific bronchial provocation tests. Glutaraldehyde levels were measured using personal and static short and longer term air samples during the challenge tests and in 13 endoscopy units and six x ray darkrooms in the region where concern about glutaraldehyde exposure had been expressed. Three of the workers investigated with occupational asthma came from departments where glutaraldehyde air measurements had been made; the others came from other hospitals or departments. Results -The diagnosis of occupational asthma was confirmed in seven workers, all ofwhom had PEF records suggestive of occupational asthma and positive specific bronchial challenge tests to glutaraldehyde. Bronchial provocation testing was negative in one worker who was no longer exposed and who had a less clearcut history of occupational asthma. Three workers also had a positive specific bronchial challenge to formaldehyde. The mean level of glutaraldehyde in air during the challenge tests was 0-068 mg/m3, about one tenth of the short term occupational exposure standard of0 7 mg/m3. The levels obtained in the challenge chamber were similar to those measured in 13 endoscopy suites and six x ray darkrooms where median short term levels were 0-16 mg/m3 during decantation in endoscopy suites and <0_009 mg/m3 in darkrooms. Conclusions -Glutaraldehyde can cause occupational asthma. The exposure levels measured in the workplace suggest that sensitisation may occur at levels below the current occupational exposure standard. (Thorax 1995;50:156-159)

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Occupational asthma due to glutaraldehyde and formaldehyde in endoscopy and x ray departments.

Gannon

Bright

Campbell

et al. 1995

Thorax

144

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(2) What is the incidence of bacteraemia after different procedures? (3) Are there any factors which may increase the risk of endocarditis?…”

Section: Gastrointestinal Instrumentation Bacteraemia and Endocarditismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many studies have documented the occurrence of bacteraemia after gastrointestinal procedures (Tables [1][2][3][4][5][6]. Interpretation of the data is complicated by differences in patient selection, in timing of blood samples, and in precise culture techniques.…”

Section: Bacteraemia After Gastrointestinal Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gastrointestinal instrumentation, bacteraemia, and endocarditis.

Shorvon¹,

Eykyn²,

Cotton³

1983

Gut

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…3,7 Preparations at high concentrations of 700e1100 ppm are not only effective against most bacteria, fungi and viruses, but also rapidly destroy resistant atypical mycobacteria and spore-bearing bacteria. 3,4,8,9 Unfortunately, fumes given off during use may cause irritation, and it is desirable to investigate the effectiveness of lower concentrations of chlorine dioxide which are less problematic. 3,4 An automated endoscope washerdisinfector can reduce staff contact with this disinfectant, providing a safer and preferable means of endoscopic reprocessing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%