论文部分内容阅读
目的利用ATP生物荧光检测法评价器械放置方式、时间和清洗方法对口腔科器械清洗效果的影响。方法选取口腔科门诊回收的污染器械,选取7件常用的器械为一套,总共选取80套,根据器械放置时间(0 h、1 h、2 h、4 h、8 h)随机分为5组,每组16套,每组再根据放置方式(干燥放置)和清洗方式(手洗和机洗)分为4个亚组,每个亚组4套,清洗后采用ATP生物荧光检测法进行清洗效果的评价。结果干燥放置组和清水浸泡组分别检测清洗后器械280件,合格率分别为82.86%和90.71%,差异有统计学意义(χ2=7.54,P=0.006);干燥组随着放置时间变长,清洗效果变差;清水组清洗效果与放置时间无关联;手洗组和机洗组总合格率分别为85.71%和86.43%,差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.06,P=0.91)。结论口腔科器械干燥放置时间越长,清洗效果越差,清洗前置于清水中可以有效提高清洗效果。
Objective To evaluate the effect of instrument placement method, time and cleaning method on the cleaning effect of dental instruments by ATP biofluorescence assay. Methods A total of 7 commonly used instruments were selected from the dental clinics. A total of 80 instruments were selected and randomly divided into 5 groups according to the instrument placement time (0 h, 1 h, 2 h, 4 h, 8 h) , Each with 16 sets. Each group was divided into 4 subgroups according to the method of placement (dry placement) and washing method (hand wash and machine wash), and 4 sets for each subgroup. After cleaning, ATP biofluorescence was used to wash evaluation of. Results After being cleaned, 280 pieces of instruments were tested in the dry place group and the clear water immersion group, the pass rates were 82.86% and 90.71% respectively, with significant difference (χ2 = 7.54, P = 0.006) The cleaning effect was not improved. The cleaning effect of fresh water group was not correlated with the placement time. The total pass rates of hand wash group and machine wash group were 85.71% and 86.43% respectively, with no significant difference (χ2 = 0.06, P = 0.91). Conclusion Dental instruments drier placed for longer, the cleaning effect worse, before cleaning placed in water can effectively improve the cleaning effect.