论文部分内容阅读
目的比较3种清洗方法对五官科吸引头的清洗效果,以探讨一种经济、环保、有效地清洗消毒方法。方法对医院五官科吸引头按随机原则每组选取200件采用3种方法清洗,对照组:冲洗、管腔内注酶、刷洗、超声清洗、含氯消毒液浸泡、水枪冲洗;试验组A:冲洗、管腔内注酶、刷洗、超声清洗、冲洗、含氯消毒液浸泡、水枪冲洗;试验组B:冲洗、管腔内注酶、刷洗、超声清洗、冲洗、煮沸消毒、水枪冲洗;以目测、小棉签、纯水检测、潜血试验、菌落数检测这5项检测标准,对3种清洗方法的清洗质量合格率进行比较。结果对照组、试验组A、B目测合格率分别为95.0%、97.5%、98.0%;小棉签检测合格率分别为85.0%、95.0%、94.5%;纯水检测合格率分别为88.5%、96.0%、96.5%;潜血试验合格率分别为83.3%、98.3%、100.0%;菌落数检测合格率分别为90.0%、100.0%、100.0%;差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论试验组A、B清洗质量合格率比对照组高;试验组A与B清洗合格率差异无统计学意义,但试验组B更环保,无刺激性、对人体无伤害、成本低、清洗人员更易接受。
Objective To compare the cleaning effect of three kinds of cleaning methods on the attractiveness of ENT to explore an economical, environmentally friendly and effective cleaning and disinfection method. Methods The hospital ENTs were randomly selected according to the principle of randomness. Three groups of 200 patients were selected and cleaned by three methods. The control group: rinsing, intraluminal injection of enzyme, brushing, ultrasonic cleaning, immersion with chlorine disinfectant, Flushing, intraluminal injection of enzyme, brushing, ultrasonic cleaning, washing, chlorine disinfectant soaking, water gun rinse; test group B: irrigation, intraluminal injection of enzyme, brushing, ultrasonic cleaning, washing, Visual inspection, a small cotton swab, water testing, occult blood test, the number of colony detection of these five testing standards, cleaning quality of the three cleaning methods to pass rate comparison. Results The pass rates of A and B in the control group and test group were 95.0%, 97.5% and 98.0%, respectively. The passing rates of small swabs were 85.0%, 95.0% and 94.5% respectively. The passing rates of pure water were 88.5% and 96.0%, respectively % And 96.5% respectively. The passing rate of occult blood test was 83.3%, 98.3% and 100.0% respectively. The pass rate of colony number detection was 90.0%, 100.0% and 100.0% respectively. The differences were statistically significant (P <0.05). Conclusion The qualified rate of cleaning quality of A and B in experimental group is higher than that in control group. There is no significant difference in qualified rate of cleaning between A and B in experimental group, but B is more environmentally friendly and non-irritating in human body, More acceptable.