Sonography machines as a source of infection.

Tesch, C.; Fröschle, G

doi:10.2214/ajr.168.2.9016251

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Unfortunately, the literature does not clearly provide an accurate and applicable method of transducer disinfection (15). While some researchers have indicated that simple wiping with a paper towel prevents infection, others have argued that this method does not prevent bacterial contamination (12)(13)(14). Preventing transducer contamination is of vital importance for avoiding hospital infections.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several methods are used to clean US transducers, including sterile paper towels, 0.9% saline solution, antiseptic solutions, alcohol and ultraviolet light (UV); however, no second optimal method has been identified due to inconsistent results (12)(13)(14)(15)(16). Therefore, the development of a practical and economic disinfection method is required.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of Probe Disinfection Procedures in Routine Ultrasonography: Hot Water versus Antiseptic Wiping

Savasci¹,

Ören

Akpak

et al. 2014

Intern. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective It is commonly known that ultrasonography (US) transducers function as both a reservoir and means of transfer for hospital infections. The current study aimed to compare the antimicrobial effectiveness of using >80 water versus antiseptic wipes to disinfect US transducers. Methods Subsequent to abdominal inspections in three groups of 20 patients, a swab culture was taken from the transducer in each case. Neither a mechanical nor chemical disinfection was applied to the transducer in the first group. As for the second group, the transducer was placed in >80 hot water for five minutes. In the third group, the transducer was wiped clean using antiseptic wipes. Results Of the 60 swab samples collected, 40 did not produce any growth. The number of samples exhibiting growth in the first group involved 18 cases of coagulase-negative staphylococcus (CNS), as well as 15 cases of Listeria spp., one case of Corynebacterium spp. and one case of Bacillus spp., while only one case of CNS was observed in the second and third groups, respectively. The culture growth and colony forming units rate were significantly higher in the samples obtained from the first group than in those obtained from the other groups (p<0.01). As for the second and third groups, no significant differences were found in terms of the amount of colonization and growth (p=1.00). Conclusion Being a practical and a simple method for particular use in developing and underdeveloped countries, where it is hard to access relatively costly transducer disinfection materials, such as antiseptic wipes, hot water disinfection may play an active role in fighting hospital infections.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Probe Disinfection Procedures in Routine Ultrasonography: Hot Water versus Antiseptic Wiping

Savasci¹,

Ören

Akpak

et al. 2014

Intern. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…72,73 Scrupulous cleaning and disinfection of the equipment (as well as of the operator's hands) before and after the examination is extremely important; the use of a sheath or other cover on the transducer should be considered to reduce the risk of cross-infection. 72,73 Scrupulous cleaning and disinfection of the equipment (as well as of the operator's hands) before and after the examination is extremely important; the use of a sheath or other cover on the transducer should be considered to reduce the risk of cross-infection.…”

Section: Intra-abdominal Abscessmentioning

confidence: 99%

The abdominal wall, peritoneum and retroperitoneum

Bradley¹,

Cosgrove²

2011

Clinical Ultrasound

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…6,11 However, simply wiping the ultrasound probes with paper towels or towels wetted with soap and water has previously been found to be ineffective at removing all potential contaminants. 5,[12][13][14][15][16] Alternative methods, such as the use of disposable sheaths or other protective barriers, may be safe with little change in image quality, 17 but the sheaths may be breached, have cost implications, are time consuming to apply and require non-latex formulations. 5,18 Probe covers are useful for endocavity scans or when the ultrasound probe may be used within a sterile field, but the probes still require decontamination.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Superiority of chlorhexidine 2%/alcohol 70% wipes in decontaminating ultrasound equipment

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ultrasound equipment is known to act as a reservoir for potentially pathogenic organisms. The aims of these studies were to establish current cleaning practices, to review the extent of bacterial contamination of ultrasound equipment in our hospital, to establish an effective cleaning regimen and to ensure that cleaning does not cause damage. A questionnaire was sent to all acute NHS hospitals in England to establish current cleaning practices. A review of our current practice was performed to establish the extent of bacterial contamination of ultrasound equipment currently in use. Laboratory studies compared cleaning the probes with soap and water with decontaminating with a chlorhexidine 2% and alcohol 70% wipe, including quantifying the residual effect. Accelerated aging was performed on the probe and staff surveyed to establish potential problems with using the wipes on the probe. The survey revealed that a variety of cleaning methods were used to decontaminate ultrasound probes; 57% of our ultrasound machines were contaminated with bacteria. The laboratory studies showed superiority of the chlorhexidine and alcohol wipes over soap and water due to a residual effect, both immediately after cleaning and after 24 hours. The staff survey demonstrated no apparent change in function of the probe after cleaning with the chlorhexidine wipes. Cleaning ultrasound probes with chlorhexidine and alcohol wipes is effective and provides additional protection against bacterial contamination due to its residual effect, and appears in the short term to have no detrimental effect on the probe.

show abstract

Sonography machines as a source of infection.

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

Comparison of Probe Disinfection Procedures in Routine Ultrasonography: Hot Water versus Antiseptic Wiping

Comparison of Probe Disinfection Procedures in Routine Ultrasonography: Hot Water versus Antiseptic Wiping

The abdominal wall, peritoneum and retroperitoneum

Superiority of chlorhexidine 2%/alcohol 70% wipes in decontaminating ultrasound equipment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About