Search

Current procedures for cleaning anesthesia airway equipment as assessed by the presence of visible and occult blood on laryngoscope blades and handles as labeled "ready for patient use" has been reported to be ineffective. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and the hepatitis B virus (HBV) are 2 commonly seen pathogens that frequently are found in the healthcare setting. It has been shown that HBV can survive on a dry surface for at least 7 days and both HIV and HBV are transmitted via blood. The potential for cross-contamination from airway equipment to patient has been shown in several studies. To prevent further potential infections, it should be ascertained why anesthesia providers are not all using disposable laryngoscope blades. The purpose of this literature review is to determine the use and infection control practices of disposable laryngoscope blades. Their frequency of use, their evaluation of ease of use, and any complications encountered when using the disposable blade are reviewed, as well as the perceptions of anesthesia providers regarding disposable laryngoscope blades.

Study Objective: To evaluate compliance of anesthesiologists and nurse anesthetists with personal hygiene and anesthetic equipment disinfection procedures in Taiwan., Design: Survey instrument., Setting: Anesthesiologists and nurse anesthetists working in medical and non-medical centers in Taiwan., Participants: 81 anesthesiologists and 181 nurse anesthetists working in medical and non-medical centers., Measurements and Main Results: Questionnaires were sent to 500 anesthesiologists and nurse anesthetists in Taiwan. Two hundred sixty-two (52%) completed questionnaires (127 from medical centers and 135 from non-medical centers). Completed questionnaires were divided into two groups: those from medical centers (Group A) and those from non-medical centers (Group B). There was no significant difference in personal hygienic practices (wearing gloves and washing hands) between Groups A and B. There were significant differences between anesthesiologists and nurse anesthetists in wearing gloves (65.3% vs. 82%; P = 0.001) and hand washing (52.6% vs. 70.4%; P = 0.003). Medical center anesthesiologists and nurse anesthetists performed better than their non-medical-center counterparts when using disinfection procedures and disinfectants for laryngoscope blades and the cleaning of fiberscopes., Conclusions: Teaching programs should include anesthesia infection control in the curriculum for anesthesiologists and nurse anesthetists.

The medical literature was reviewed to evaluate the risk of disease transmission and nosocomial infection associated with flexible laryngoscopes. These instruments have been reported to be contaminated with blood, body fluids, organic debris, and potentially pathogenic microorganisms during routine clinical use. Failure to reprocess properly a flexible laryngoscope may, therefore, result in patient-to-patient disease transmission. Different types of biocidal agents, including 70% isopropyl alcohol, quaternary ammonium compounds, and 2% glutaraldehyde have been reported to be used to disinfect flexible laryngoscopes. A logic, or algorithm, was developed to evaluate the adequacy of these and other types of biocidal agents used during instrument reprocessing. This review determined that flexible laryngoscopes are semicritical instruments that require high-level disinfection (or sterilization) to prevent nosocomial infection. Whereas 70% isopropyl alcohol, quaternary ammonium compounds, and other products that achieve intermediate-level or low-level disinfection are contraindicated for reprocessing flexible laryngoscopes, 2% glutaraldehyde and other products that achieve high-level disinfection (or sterilization) are recommended for reprocessing these instruments to prevent nosocomial infection. A formal set of step-by-step guidelines for reprocessing flexible laryngoscopes is provided. Use of a disposable sheath to cover and protect the flexible laryngoscope from contamination during clinical use is discussed.

Neither a consensus statement nor a formal set of step-by-step guidelines for reprocessing rigid laryngoscopes have been published or endorsed by professional organizations. Several published guidelines, standards, and clinical reports were reviewed to evaluate the risk of nosocomial infection associated with the use of rigid laryngoscopes, to determine their minimum reprocessing requirements. This review found that the recommendations of some guidelines and standards for reprocessing rigid laryngoscopes are incomplete, inadequate, and inconsistent with one another, and that current practices for reprocessing rigid laryngoscopes are reported to be inadequate and lack standardization. It is recommended that a consensus statement be developed that standardizes the reprocessing of rigid laryngoscopes and requires cleaning followed by high-level disinfection (or sterilization) and drying of the rigid laryngoscope's blade and handle to prevent nosocomial infection, regardless of whether a protective barrier or sheath is used during the procedure.

The laryngoscope is identified as a potential vector for cross-infection. Case reports are presented, as are reports of bacterial and occult blood contamination of laryngoscope blades and handles. Infection control policies covering laryngoscope blade and handle processing are outlined relative to procedures of a teaching hospital department. Repeated decontamination of laryngoscope blades has resulted in a perceived decrease in reliability. This is reflected in a departmental survey where 86% of respondents consider the standard laryngoscope is only intermittently reliable and that there is room for improvement.

Outbreaks of infection in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) due to Serratia marcescens are well recognized. In some outbreaks no point source has been found, whereas in others cross-infection has been associated with contaminated ventilator equipment, disinfectants, hands and breast pumps. We report an outbreak due to S. marcescens that involved two geographically distinct NICUs. The outbreak occurred over a six week period; 17 babies were colonized, 12 at Glasgow Royal Maternity Hospital (GRMH) and five at the Queen Mothers Hospital (QMH). At GRMH three babies developed septicaemia, of whom two died. The outbreak isolates were of the same serotype and phage type and were indistinguishable on the basis of restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis. During the outbreak, two babies shown consistently to be negative on screening, were transferred between the two units. In addition, two members of medical staff attended both units. In QMH no means of cross infection was identified. However, in GRMH the outbreak strain of S. marcescens was isolated from a laryngoscope blade and a sample of expressed breast milk., (Copyright 2000 The Hospital Infection Society.)