Cargando…

Time‐effectiveness and convenience of transvaginal ultrasound probe disinfection using ultraviolet vs chlorine dioxide multistep wipe system: prospective survey study

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficiency, ease of use and user satisfaction of two methods of transvaginal ultrasound probe high‐level disinfection: ultraviolet‐C radiation (UV‐C) and a chlorine dioxide multistep wipe system. METHODS: This was a prospective survey study. UV‐C units were introduced into...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kyriacou, C., Robinson, E., Barcroft, J., Parker, N., Tuomey, M., Stalder, C., Gould, D., Al‐Memar, M., Bourne, T.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9414347/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34919771
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.24834
_version_ 1784775965123018752
author Kyriacou, C.
Robinson, E.
Barcroft, J.
Parker, N.
Tuomey, M.
Stalder, C.
Gould, D.
Al‐Memar, M.
Bourne, T.
author_facet Kyriacou, C.
Robinson, E.
Barcroft, J.
Parker, N.
Tuomey, M.
Stalder, C.
Gould, D.
Al‐Memar, M.
Bourne, T.
author_sort Kyriacou, C.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficiency, ease of use and user satisfaction of two methods of transvaginal ultrasound probe high‐level disinfection: ultraviolet‐C radiation (UV‐C) and a chlorine dioxide multistep wipe system. METHODS: This was a prospective survey study. UV‐C units were introduced into a busy early pregnancy assessment service and compared with a multiwipe system for disinfection. Before seeing each patient, healthcare professionals (HCPs) measured with a stopwatch the time taken to complete a cycle of disinfection using either UV‐C or chlorine dioxide multistep wipes and responded to a quick‐response (QR) code‐linked survey. Additional essential tasks that could be completed before seeing the next patient during probe disinfection were also documented. Using another QR code‐linked survey, data on ease of use, satisfaction with the system used and preferred system were collected. The ease of use and satisfaction with the system were rated on a 0 to 10 Likert scale (0 poor, 10 excellent). A free‐text section for comments was then completed. RESULTS: Disinfection using UV‐C (n = 331) was 60% faster than the chlorine dioxide multiwipe system (n = 332) (101 vs 250 s; P < 0.0001). A greater number of tasks were completed during probe disinfection when using UV‐C, saving a further 74 s per patient (P < 0.0001). The HCPs using UV‐C (n = 71) reported greater ease of use (median Likert score, 10 vs 3; P < 0.0001) and satisfaction (median Likert score, 10 vs 2; P < 0.0001) compared with those using the multiwipe system (n = 43). HCPs reported that the chlorine dioxide system was time‐consuming and environmentally unfriendly, while the UV‐C system was efficient and easy to use. Overall, 98% of the HCPs preferred using the UV‐C system. CONCLUSIONS: UV‐C technology is more time‐efficient and allows more essential tasks to be completed during disinfection. For a 4‐h ultrasound list of 15 patients, the use of UV‐C would save 55 min 45 s. HCPs found UV‐C preferable and easier to use. © 2021 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9414347
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94143472022-08-31 Time‐effectiveness and convenience of transvaginal ultrasound probe disinfection using ultraviolet vs chlorine dioxide multistep wipe system: prospective survey study Kyriacou, C. Robinson, E. Barcroft, J. Parker, N. Tuomey, M. Stalder, C. Gould, D. Al‐Memar, M. Bourne, T. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol Original Papers OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficiency, ease of use and user satisfaction of two methods of transvaginal ultrasound probe high‐level disinfection: ultraviolet‐C radiation (UV‐C) and a chlorine dioxide multistep wipe system. METHODS: This was a prospective survey study. UV‐C units were introduced into a busy early pregnancy assessment service and compared with a multiwipe system for disinfection. Before seeing each patient, healthcare professionals (HCPs) measured with a stopwatch the time taken to complete a cycle of disinfection using either UV‐C or chlorine dioxide multistep wipes and responded to a quick‐response (QR) code‐linked survey. Additional essential tasks that could be completed before seeing the next patient during probe disinfection were also documented. Using another QR code‐linked survey, data on ease of use, satisfaction with the system used and preferred system were collected. The ease of use and satisfaction with the system were rated on a 0 to 10 Likert scale (0 poor, 10 excellent). A free‐text section for comments was then completed. RESULTS: Disinfection using UV‐C (n = 331) was 60% faster than the chlorine dioxide multiwipe system (n = 332) (101 vs 250 s; P < 0.0001). A greater number of tasks were completed during probe disinfection when using UV‐C, saving a further 74 s per patient (P < 0.0001). The HCPs using UV‐C (n = 71) reported greater ease of use (median Likert score, 10 vs 3; P < 0.0001) and satisfaction (median Likert score, 10 vs 2; P < 0.0001) compared with those using the multiwipe system (n = 43). HCPs reported that the chlorine dioxide system was time‐consuming and environmentally unfriendly, while the UV‐C system was efficient and easy to use. Overall, 98% of the HCPs preferred using the UV‐C system. CONCLUSIONS: UV‐C technology is more time‐efficient and allows more essential tasks to be completed during disinfection. For a 4‐h ultrasound list of 15 patients, the use of UV‐C would save 55 min 45 s. HCPs found UV‐C preferable and easier to use. © 2021 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2022-07-01 2022-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9414347/ /pubmed/34919771 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.24834 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Papers
Kyriacou, C.
Robinson, E.
Barcroft, J.
Parker, N.
Tuomey, M.
Stalder, C.
Gould, D.
Al‐Memar, M.
Bourne, T.
Time‐effectiveness and convenience of transvaginal ultrasound probe disinfection using ultraviolet vs chlorine dioxide multistep wipe system: prospective survey study
title Time‐effectiveness and convenience of transvaginal ultrasound probe disinfection using ultraviolet vs chlorine dioxide multistep wipe system: prospective survey study
title_full Time‐effectiveness and convenience of transvaginal ultrasound probe disinfection using ultraviolet vs chlorine dioxide multistep wipe system: prospective survey study
title_fullStr Time‐effectiveness and convenience of transvaginal ultrasound probe disinfection using ultraviolet vs chlorine dioxide multistep wipe system: prospective survey study
title_full_unstemmed Time‐effectiveness and convenience of transvaginal ultrasound probe disinfection using ultraviolet vs chlorine dioxide multistep wipe system: prospective survey study
title_short Time‐effectiveness and convenience of transvaginal ultrasound probe disinfection using ultraviolet vs chlorine dioxide multistep wipe system: prospective survey study
title_sort time‐effectiveness and convenience of transvaginal ultrasound probe disinfection using ultraviolet vs chlorine dioxide multistep wipe system: prospective survey study
topic Original Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9414347/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34919771
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.24834
work_keys_str_mv AT kyriacouc timeeffectivenessandconvenienceoftransvaginalultrasoundprobedisinfectionusingultravioletvschlorinedioxidemultistepwipesystemprospectivesurveystudy
AT robinsone timeeffectivenessandconvenienceoftransvaginalultrasoundprobedisinfectionusingultravioletvschlorinedioxidemultistepwipesystemprospectivesurveystudy
AT barcroftj timeeffectivenessandconvenienceoftransvaginalultrasoundprobedisinfectionusingultravioletvschlorinedioxidemultistepwipesystemprospectivesurveystudy
AT parkern timeeffectivenessandconvenienceoftransvaginalultrasoundprobedisinfectionusingultravioletvschlorinedioxidemultistepwipesystemprospectivesurveystudy
AT tuomeym timeeffectivenessandconvenienceoftransvaginalultrasoundprobedisinfectionusingultravioletvschlorinedioxidemultistepwipesystemprospectivesurveystudy
AT stalderc timeeffectivenessandconvenienceoftransvaginalultrasoundprobedisinfectionusingultravioletvschlorinedioxidemultistepwipesystemprospectivesurveystudy
AT gouldd timeeffectivenessandconvenienceoftransvaginalultrasoundprobedisinfectionusingultravioletvschlorinedioxidemultistepwipesystemprospectivesurveystudy
AT almemarm timeeffectivenessandconvenienceoftransvaginalultrasoundprobedisinfectionusingultravioletvschlorinedioxidemultistepwipesystemprospectivesurveystudy
AT bournet timeeffectivenessandconvenienceoftransvaginalultrasoundprobedisinfectionusingultravioletvschlorinedioxidemultistepwipesystemprospectivesurveystudy