Karen K. Hoffmann

Disinfection Practices for Endoscopes and Other Semicritical Items

OBJECTIVE To determine the disinfection practices employed by North Carolina hospitals for endoscopes and other semicritical patient care items and to discuss minimally acceptable disinfection procedures for these items. DESIGN A survey questionnaire was mailed to all North Carolina hospitals to identify their disinfection practices, and a literature review was conducted to ascertain studies that evaluated disinfection techniques for certain semicritical items. PARTICIPANTS Questionnaires were returned by 107 of 167 (64%) North Carolina acute-care hospitals. RESULTS Most hospitals (91%) used a glutaraldehyde-based disinfectant (59%, 2% glutaraldehyde; 29%, 0.13% glutaraldehyde-0.44% phenol-0.08% phenate; 3%, either); half (51%) of the hospitals immersed the endoscope into disinfectant for greater than or equal to 20 minutes, but 44% immersed for less than or equal to 10 minutes; nearly all hospitals (97%) disinfected endoscopes at room temperature. Hospitals rinsed the endoscope with sterile water (16%), tap water (54%), tap water followed by alcohol rinse (27%), or other (2%); 58% of the hospitals treated endoscopes from patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), or Mycobacterium tuberculosis differently (81%, ethylene oxide [ETO] sterilization; 10%, increased exposure time; 10%, other). Twenty percent of the hospitals used an automated washer for processing endoscopic instruments. Rigid endoscopes (e.g., arthroscopes, laparoscopes) were primarily high-level disinfected (57%), ETO sterilized (17%), or either (13%). The disinfection strategies for other semi-critical items (e.g., applanation tonometers, cryosurgical instruments, and diaphragm fitting rings) were highly variable for the responding hospitals. CONCLUSIONS This survey indicated the presence of a wide variety of practices for handling semicritical patient care items, many of which are inconsistent with current recommendations. To help establish minimally acceptable disinfection procedures for some patient care instruments (e.g., arthroscopes, laparoscopes, tonometers), the scientific literature was reviewed and recommendations were made.

Relative frequency of nosocomial pathogens at a university hospital during the decade 1980 to 1989.

BACKGROUND We compared the relative frequency of pathogens isolated from 1985 to 1989 (N = 4358) with those isolated from 1980 to 1984 (N = 5290) in a university hospital to determine trends in the relative importance of pathogens causing nosocomial infection. METHODS Our study was based on surveillance data prospectively obtained between 1980 and 1989 from a 600-bed university hospital. Statistically significant trends occurring from 1980 to 1984 to 1985 to 1989 were determined by chi 2 tests with Bonferroni corrections (i.e., p less than [0.05/17]). RESULTS Overall an increased frequency of isolation occurred for Candida and other yeasts and for Haemophilus species. A decreased frequency was noted for Proteus species, non-Bacteroides anaerobes, and Serratia species. Comparison of 1985 to 1989 with 1980 to 1984 revealed that the most significant change in nosocomial pathogens was the marked increase in infections with yeast, principally Candida species. Candida and other yeast infections increased 40%, from 7.6% (rank, 5) to 10.6% (rank, 3) of all pathogens isolated. Increases, which occurred in urine, blood, and wound isolates, were especially marked among surgical patients. In addition, a significant increase was noted among blood isolates in the isolation of yeast other than Candida albicans. CONCLUSIONS We conclude that Candida and other yeasts are being isolated increasingly as causative agents of nosocomial infection.

Pseudoepidemic of Rhodotorula rubra in patients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy.

Between March and June 1988, Rhodotorula rubra was isolated from the bronchial washings of 30 of 56 (54%) patients undergoing bronchoscopy at a North Carolina community hospital. Pulmonary disease consistent with invasive fungal pneumonia was not apparent for any patient. Repeat sputum cultures were performed on 11 patients, none of whom were positive for R rubra. Investigation revealed fungal contamination of two brushes used to clean the bronchoscope channels and one positive sample of the tub water used to test the integrity of the bronchoscope prior to cleaning and disinfection. Control measures instituted were high-level disinfection of all equipment used to clean the bronchoscopes, including the brushes, complete air drying of the bronchoscopes before storing and storage of equipment in closed cabinets. An additional case one month after instituting these measures prompted the addition of a final 70% ethyl alcohol rinse of the bronchoscopes immediately prior to storage. Over a six-month period no additional cases have been identified. Despite published disinfection guidelines, pseudoepidemics and infections from contaminated equipment continue to appear. This pseudoepidemic investigation revealed a site for contaminating bronchoscopes that has not been previously reported, the inner cannula cleaning brushes. This emphasizes the need for stringent adherence to recommended cleaning and disinfection guidelines.

Control of Healthcare‐Associated Staphylococcus aureus: Survey of Practices in North Carolina Hospitals

Although patients colonized or infected with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus have been placed on contact isolation for many years, more recent guidelines recommend enhanced control measures, such as routine active surveillance. We report here the results of a survey of 70 hospitals in North Carolina with regard to current management issues surrounding methicillin-resistant S. aureus.