@entity11540 and XXXX Gas Plasma Sterilization: Precautionary Practices in U.S. Hospitals.

@entity1 @entity11540 @entity273 @entity6157
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate precautionary practices and extent of use of @entity11540 ( @entity6157 ) and @entity273 gas plasma (HPGP) sterilization systems, including use of single chamber @entity6157 units. DESIGN: Modular, web-based survey. @entity1 : Members of professional practice organizations who reported using @entity6157 or HPGP in the past week to sterilize medical instruments and supplies. Participating organizations invited members via email which included a hyperlink to the survey. METHODS: Descriptive analyses were conducted including simple frequencies and prevalences. RESULTS: A total of 428 respondents completed the module on chemical sterilants. Because most respondents worked in hospitals (87%, n=373) analysis focused on these workers. Most used HPGP sterilizers (84%, n=373), 38% used @entity6157 sterilizers, with 22% using both. Nearly all respondents using @entity6157 operated single chamber units (94%, n=120); most of them reported that the units employed single use cartridges (83%, n=115). Examples of where engineering and administrative controls were lacking for @entity6157 include: operational local exhaust ventilation (7%; n=114); continuous air monitoring (6%; n=113); safe handling training (6%; n=142); and standard operating procedures (4%; n=142). Examples of practices which may increase HPGP exposure risk included lack of standard operating procedures (9%; n=311) and safe handling training (8%; n=312). CONCLUSIONS: Use of precautionary practices was good but not universal. @entity6157 use appears to have diminished in favor of HPGP which affords higher throughput and minimal regulatory constraints. Separate @entity6157 sterilization and aeration units were still being used nearly one year after U.S. EPA prohibited their use.
