Search

Background: Instilling eye drops is a ubiquitous procedure in eye clinics. This audit aimed to assess the risk of contamination of disposable droppers and to quantify the financial and waste implications of reducing this risk to zero by using disposable droppers only once., Methods: A total of 100 disposable Minims were used to place one drop in each eye of 70 patients. The dropper tip was then cultured for aerobic and anaerobic microbes., Results: Coagulase-negative staphylococcus was cultured from five samples. The contamination rate per drop application was 2.5%. The risk of cross-contamination with coagulase-negative staphylococcus would be between 1 : 400 and 1 : 80 if the bottle was reused once or six times. Reducing this risk to zero costs between pound2.75 and pound4.6 million per annum and generates between 6.85 and 11.42 more tonnes of paper waste and between 12.69 and 21.15 more tonnes of plastic waste than a strategy that reuses the disposable dropper., Conclusion: Reducing the risk of dropper contamination and subsequent cross infection has financial and environmental costs. As exposure to coagulase-negative staphylococcus is not necessarily associated with infection, it would be useful to decide acceptable risk levels for a given cost to maximise both cost-effectiveness and patient safety.

Aims: The instillation of a combined fluorescein-anaesthetic eye drop is common practice in most ophthalmology clinics. Chauvin Pharmaceuticals produce unpreserved proxymethacaine 0.5% and fluorescein 0.25% in a Minims vial (PFM) intended for single application only. Our aim was to determine whether the reuse of these eye drops for multiple applications has the potential for bacterial transmission., Methods: Samples were collected from doctors in general outpatient clinics. Each sample constituted a blood agar plate inoculated with the initial drop of fluid from a PFM as a control. The vial was then used for multiple applications on consecutive patients. One of the last remaining drops was then inoculated onto an alternate marked site on the same plate to serve as the test sample. The samples were immediately transported to the Microbiology laboratory and incubated at 37 degrees C for 48 h. The results were interpreted thereafter by a Microbiologist., Results: A total of 41 samples were collected by eight Samplers. In all, 7/41(17%) samples showed growth of normal conjunctiva and lid flora on the test area. These were coagulase negative Staphylococci and Corynebacterium spp., Conclusions: The reuse of single application of PFM should be questioned due to the potential risk of transmitting pathogens. A change to a single use only policy would result in a projected threefold increase in the annual budget for these drops.

Aim: Due to the theoretical possibility of prion transmission in applanation tonometry, many ophthalmological units in the United Kingdom now use disposable tonometer prisms. We have investigated the potential for bacterial and viral transmission from the health practitioner to the patient via disposable prisms., Methods: All staff who perform applanation tonometry at the Sussex Eye Hospital (SEH) received a questionnaire to evaluate if the applanating face of the prism is touched during tonometry and the ease of use of the disposable prism compared to the reusable prisms that were previously used. We then cultured prisms handled by a random sample of staff members for common bacteria. Finally, we constructed a model to investigate the possibility of interpatient adenoviral transmission via disposable tonometer prisms., Results: The questionnaire revealed that almost 50% of the staff admit to touching the applanating face of the tonometer prism prior to applanation. Cultures of the prisms grew a range of bacteria including Staphylococcus epidermidis, Staphylococcus aureus, and Bacillus species. The viral model suggested that adenovirus could be transmitted by applanation tonometry., Conclusion: The use of disposable prisms for applanation tonometry may reduce the risk of prion transmission but is not bacteriologically or virologically aseptic. This is a potential infection risk to patients.