Cargando…

Cross-contamination rate of reusable flexible bronchoscopes: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Bronchoscopy is generally a safe and efficient procedure. However, the risk of cross-contamination with reusable flexible bronchoscopes (RFB) has been detected in several outbreaks worldwide. AIM: To estimate the average cross-contamination rate of patient-ready RFBs based on available p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Travis, Helena S, Russell, Rasmus V, Kovaleva, Julia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10090576/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37065274
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17571774231158203
_version_ 1785022988699041792
author Travis, Helena S
Russell, Rasmus V
Kovaleva, Julia
author_facet Travis, Helena S
Russell, Rasmus V
Kovaleva, Julia
author_sort Travis, Helena S
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Bronchoscopy is generally a safe and efficient procedure. However, the risk of cross-contamination with reusable flexible bronchoscopes (RFB) has been detected in several outbreaks worldwide. AIM: To estimate the average cross-contamination rate of patient-ready RFBs based on available published data. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review in PubMed and Embase to investigate the cross-contamination rate of RFB. Included studies identified indicator organisms or colony forming units (CFU) levels, and total number of samples >10. The Contamination threshold was defined according to the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Nurse and Associates (ESGE-ESGENA) guidelines. To calculate the total contamination rate, a random effects model was applied. Heterogeneity was analysed via a Q-test and illustrated in a forest plot. Publication bias was analysed via the Egger’s regression test and illustrated in a funnel plot. RESULTS: Eight studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The random effects model included 2169 samples and 149 events (positive tests). The total RFB cross-contamination rate was 8.69% ± 1.86 (standard division [SD]) (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.06–12.33%). The result showed significant heterogeneity of 90% and publication bias. DISCUSSION: Significant heterogeneity and publication bias is likely associated with varying methodology and aversion towards publishing negative findings, respectively. Based on the cross-contamination rate an infection control paradigm shift is needed to ensure patient safety. We recommend to follow the Spaulding classification and classify RFBs as critical items. Accordingly, infection control measures such as obligatory surveillance, and implementing single-use alternatives must be considered where feasible.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10090576
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100905762023-04-13 Cross-contamination rate of reusable flexible bronchoscopes: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis Travis, Helena S Russell, Rasmus V Kovaleva, Julia J Infect Prev Reviews BACKGROUND: Bronchoscopy is generally a safe and efficient procedure. However, the risk of cross-contamination with reusable flexible bronchoscopes (RFB) has been detected in several outbreaks worldwide. AIM: To estimate the average cross-contamination rate of patient-ready RFBs based on available published data. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review in PubMed and Embase to investigate the cross-contamination rate of RFB. Included studies identified indicator organisms or colony forming units (CFU) levels, and total number of samples >10. The Contamination threshold was defined according to the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Nurse and Associates (ESGE-ESGENA) guidelines. To calculate the total contamination rate, a random effects model was applied. Heterogeneity was analysed via a Q-test and illustrated in a forest plot. Publication bias was analysed via the Egger’s regression test and illustrated in a funnel plot. RESULTS: Eight studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The random effects model included 2169 samples and 149 events (positive tests). The total RFB cross-contamination rate was 8.69% ± 1.86 (standard division [SD]) (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.06–12.33%). The result showed significant heterogeneity of 90% and publication bias. DISCUSSION: Significant heterogeneity and publication bias is likely associated with varying methodology and aversion towards publishing negative findings, respectively. Based on the cross-contamination rate an infection control paradigm shift is needed to ensure patient safety. We recommend to follow the Spaulding classification and classify RFBs as critical items. Accordingly, infection control measures such as obligatory surveillance, and implementing single-use alternatives must be considered where feasible. SAGE Publications 2023-02-24 2023-05 /pmc/articles/PMC10090576/ /pubmed/37065274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17571774231158203 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Reviews
Travis, Helena S
Russell, Rasmus V
Kovaleva, Julia
Cross-contamination rate of reusable flexible bronchoscopes: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis
title Cross-contamination rate of reusable flexible bronchoscopes: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis
title_full Cross-contamination rate of reusable flexible bronchoscopes: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Cross-contamination rate of reusable flexible bronchoscopes: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Cross-contamination rate of reusable flexible bronchoscopes: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis
title_short Cross-contamination rate of reusable flexible bronchoscopes: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis
title_sort cross-contamination rate of reusable flexible bronchoscopes: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis
topic Reviews
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10090576/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37065274
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17571774231158203
work_keys_str_mv AT travishelenas crosscontaminationrateofreusableflexiblebronchoscopesasystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysis
AT russellrasmusv crosscontaminationrateofreusableflexiblebronchoscopesasystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysis
AT kovalevajulia crosscontaminationrateofreusableflexiblebronchoscopesasystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysis