Formaldehyde as a Disinfectant
Formaldehyde as a Disinfectant
- Research Article
54
- 10.1016/s0016-5107(01)70086-7
- Dec 1, 2001
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Transmission of infection by gastrointestional endoscopy: May 2001
- Abstract
- 10.1016/j.ajic.2005.04.201
- Jun 1, 2005
- American Journal of Infection Control
The science of disinfection in ARTS (assisted reproductive technology services)
- Research Article
198
- 10.1016/j.ajic.2012.11.005
- Apr 25, 2013
- American Journal of Infection Control
Disinfection and sterilization: An overview
- Research Article
37
- 10.1002/jum.16167
- Jan 19, 2023
- Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine
Guidelines for
- Discussion
6
- 10.1016/s0016-5107(99)70250-6
- Aug 1, 1999
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
What is disinfection, sterilization?
- Research Article
7
- 10.1016/j.cgh.2010.04.025
- Jun 23, 2010
- Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology
The Study of a Contaminated Colonoscope
- Research Article
- 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-2907.2008.14.002
- Jun 16, 2008
- Chinese Journal of Modern Nursing
Objective To investigate the classification of major bacteria and pathogen strains before and after inner tubes disinfection within the trachea after the tracheotomy, and to compare the method of disinfection and the results. Methods 110 patients after tracheotomy were randomly selected, and tracheal tubes were sampled before the disinfection and were conducted a bacterial culture analysis. These tracheal tubes were disinfected by boiling for 20 minutes and 30 minutes, respectively. Then they were soaked in 75% ethanol, 2% glularaldehyde and 3% hydrogen peroxide for 20 minutes and 30 minutes, respectively. The disinfection effects were compared among the four disinfection methods and disinfectants, and the two groups of disinfection time. Results 62 cases before the disinfection were sampled to make a bacterial culture. 89 strains in 18 species were cultivated, and no bacteria in six cases. Pathogenic bacteria and conditioned pathogen accounted for 80 percent (P<0.05). For the four disinfection methods including boiling disinfection, 75% ethanol, 2% glutaraldehyde and 3% hydrogen peroxide immersion disinfection, after 20 minutes of disinfection and immersion disinfection, 75% ethanol immersion disinfection had statistical meanings with the positive rates of boiling disinfection, 3% H2O2 and 2% glutaraldehyde soaking disinfection, respectively (P<0.05) ; After 30 minutes of disinfection, all of the four disinfection methods had no statistical meaning. Conclusions Pathogenic bacteria cultivated before the disinfection of tracheal tubes are much more than the non-pathogenic bacteria. Boiling disinfection for 20 minutes, 3% hydrogen peroxide and 2% glutaraldehyde disinfectant soaking for 20 minutes, and 75% ethanol immersion disinfection for 30 minutes can achieve good disinfection results. From the aspects of high efficiency, safety and low cost, 3% hydrogen peroxide is the best choice. Key words: Tracheostomy; Bacterial culture; Inner tubes; Disinfection
- Research Article
12
- 10.1017/ice.2016.11
- Feb 4, 2016
- Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology
Effectiveness of a Hydrogen Peroxide Mist (Trophon) System in Inactivating Healthcare Pathogens on Surface and Endocavitary Probes
- Front Matter
- 10.1016/j.cgh.2022.04.018
- May 11, 2022
- Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology
Sterilization of Our Echoendoscopes—More Questions Than Answers
- Abstract
- 10.1016/j.ajic.2019.04.022
- May 27, 2019
- American Journal of Infection Control
High Level Disinfection: A Comprehensive and Innovative Quality Improvement Approach in a Multi-Facility Academic Health Center
- Discussion
10
- 10.1378/chest.126.3.1001
- Sep 1, 2004
- Chest
The Importance of Bronchoscope Reprocessing Guidelines: Raising the Standard of Care
- Front Matter
3
- 10.1016/s0016-5107(99)70093-3
- Oct 1, 1999
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
GI endoscopic reprocessing: maintaining public confidence in the face of decreasing reimbursements
- Abstract
- 10.1016/j.ajic.2015.04.033
- May 28, 2015
- American Journal of Infection Control
A Health System Approach to Improving High Level Disinfection Practices
- Front Matter
20
- 10.1016/s0016-5107(99)70246-4
- Aug 1, 1999
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Gaining perspective on reprocessing of GI endoscopes
- Research Article
- 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1672-7088.2012.20.087
- Jul 18, 2012
- The Journal of practical nursing
Objective To iavestigate the influence of two disinfectants methods on disintection efficiency and model precision of dental impression.Methods Alginate impressions,alginate and agar complex impressions and silicon rubber impressions were made according to a unified standard.Chlorinous disinfectant solution and acidic oxidative potential water were used to disinfect the infected impressions.The influence of two disinfectants on disinfection efficiency and model precision of dental impression was compared.Results Two disinfectants for 30 minutes had significant disinfection effect on these three kinds of impressions.The effective rate reached 99.48%.Chlorinous disinfectant solution bad no significant influence on the model precision of alginate impressions and silicon rubber impressions,but had significant influence on the model precision of alginate and agar complex impressions.Acidic oxidative potential water did not influence the model precision of the three dental impressions.Conclusions Acidic oxidative potential water can be used to disinfect the three dental impressions.Chlorinous disinfectant solution can be used to disinfect alginate impressions and silicon rubber impressions,but cannot be used to disinfect agar complex impressions. Key words: Dental impression disinfect; Chlorinous disinfectant solution; Acidic oxidative potential water; Model precision; Disinfection effect
- Ask R Discovery
- Chat PDF
AI summaries and top papers from 250M+ research sources.