Experimental modelling of failure risks using wipe dispenser systems and ready-to-use disinfecting wipes and their consequences
Introduction: A blinded survey in 81 dental practices, 84 medical practices, and 35 hospitals revealed that for conducting disinfecting surface cleaning and surface disinfection, instead of reusable clothes moistened on-site with disinfectant solution, either wipe dispenser systems for self-preparat...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | deu |
| Published: |
German Medical Science GMS Publishing House
2025-07-01
|
| Series: | GMS Hygiene and Infection Control |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://journals.publisso.de/en/journals/hic/volume20/dgkh000571 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Introduction: A blinded survey in 81 dental practices, 84 medical practices, and 35 hospitals revealed that for conducting disinfecting surface cleaning and surface disinfection, instead of reusable clothes moistened on-site with disinfectant solution, either wipe dispenser systems for self-preparation or ready-to-use (RTU) wipes are being used. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine, i.e., the impact of incorrect loading of the wipe roll with disinfectant solution (DS) when using wipe dispenser systems, and the consistency of the DS delivery amount when using RTU wipes.
Method: In two different wipe dispenser systems, the saturation of the wipe roll after loading with DS was visually inspected and photographically documented by adding 0.1% fluorescein sodium to the disinfectant solution. The coverage of the wipes used on a melamine resin surface (75x133 cm) was visually checked after a defined wiping mode following analogous staining.
For two RTU products, a flow pack and a stand-up bag pwith the opening at the top, the saturation of the wipes and the delivery amount of the DS during use were gravimetrically determined.
Results: In the wipe dispenser system with alcohol-based DS, the amount of disinfectant solution released decreased when the solution was loaded horizontally or vertically, instead of circularly as recommended by the manufacturer. After circular loading with the manufacturer-recommended wetting time of 30 minutes, the wipe rolls were evenly saturated, and the delivery amount onto the surface during wiping disinfection was sufficiently constant. In the wipe dispenser system with an oxygen-releasing DS, after horizontal instead of circular loading the residual volume in the dispenser after removal of the last cloth was 320 ml instead 350 ml. The delivery amount onto the surface during wiping disinfection was therefore also lower (4.2+0.574 g instead of 5.0+0.606 g, p<0.0001).
For the flow pack, uniform saturation was achieved when the package was stored upside down with the sealed opening facing downward the night before the first use. In the vertical pack, the delivery amount of the first wipe was significantly lower than that of the subsequent wipes.
Conclusion: For the tested flow pack, it should be noted in the user manual that the flow pack should be stored upside down, i.e., with the opening facing downward, for more than 12 hours before the first use, to achieve uniform wetting of all wipes.
For the stand-up bag, it is important to follow the manufacturer's instruction that the first wipe be discarded.
Since the DS delivery amount differed between the flow pack and vertical pack, it would be beneficial if, as in both cases, the manufacturer generally specified the reach for wiping disinfection for each RTU product. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2196-5226 |