论文部分内容阅读
目的对比分析无菌小毛巾和TORK擦手纸两种不同擦手方法对手消毒的效果分析。方法术前两遍洗手之间分别用无菌小毛巾和TORK擦手纸将手擦干,对手术医生双手取样培养,分析对应的手术切口感染情况。在分别检测小毛巾和擦手纸的细菌污染情况。结果无菌毛巾组擦手后,50例次细菌培养中有4例有菌检出,无菌率92%;擦手纸组50例次细菌培养中有3例有菌检出,无菌率94%。两组之间差别无显著性。同期两组颈部手术患者均无切口感染。对毛巾和擦手纸多点多时的细菌培养,显示小毛巾桶打开后,1小时内无菌生长,2小时培养有1个菌落,3小时有5个菌落。无菌擦手纸开始使用后,0、1/12小时无细菌菌落生成;1天、3天培养各有1细菌菌落。结论无菌擦手纸安全,使用方便。只要管理严格,是有效的无菌擦手方法,可以代替原来的无菌小毛巾。
Objective To comparatively analyze the disinfection effect of two different hand rubs with sterile towel and TORK paper towel. Methods Wash hands with sterile towel and TORK paper towel two times before operation, wipe dry hands with both hands and sample the surgeons’ hands, and analyze the corresponding incision infections. In the detection of small towels and paper towels, respectively, the bacterial contamination. Results After the towel was rubbed by the aseptic towel set, 4 out of 50 cases of bacterial cultures were detected with a bacteriostasis rate of 92%. Three of the 50 bacterial cultures in the paper towel group were detected with a bacterial count of 94 %. No significant difference between the two groups. In the same period, two groups of neck surgery patients had no incision infection. Bacterial cultures of towels and paper towels for prolonged periods of time showed aseptic growth within 1 hour after opening the small towel pails, 1 colony in 2 hours and 5 colonies in 3 hours. Aseptic paper towels started to use, 0,1 / 12 hours without bacterial colonies; 1 day, 3 days of culture each have 1 bacterial colonies. Conclusion Sterile paper towels are safe and easy to use. As long as strict management, is an effective method of aseptic hand rubbing, can replace the original sterile small towel.