Short-Cycle Autoclave Sterilization of Instruments in Same-Day Ophthalmic Surgeries
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
What Is the Issue? The volume of ophthalmic surgeries is increasingly high, with cataract surgery being 1 of the most performed surgeries in Canada. Infections following ophthalmic surgeries, while rare, can cause severe complications that may lead to irreversible vision loss. Reducing postsurgery infections is a high priority in clinical practice. Running a full wrapped, terminal steam sterilization cycle for ophthalmic instruments in autoclaves may be inefficient for ophthalmic surgeries and may cause unnecessary heavy economic and environmental burdens due to high surgical volumes. Using instruments sterilized on a short cycle between sequential same-day ophthalmic surgeries may help improve efficiency and reduce resources used. These instruments are generally processed using autoclaves (i.e., steam sterilizers); the effectiveness of a shorter-cycle method of sterilization is unclear. What Did We Do? To inform decisions regarding the use of autoclaves for short-cycle sterilization for sequential same-day instrument use in ophthalmic surgery, we sought to identify and summarize evidence comparing this method to full-cycle sterilization of wrapped instruments and identify any relevant recommendations. We searched key resources, including journal citation databases, and conducted a focused internet search for relevant evidence published since 2012. One reviewer screened articles for inclusion based on predefined criteria. What Did We Find? In a laboratory setting to simulate sequential same-day procedures, short-cycle sterilization with interrupted dry time for unwrapped ophthalmic instruments is feasibly as effective as full-cycle sterilization for wrapped instruments using the STATIM autoclave. Similarly, short-cycle sterilization with interrupted dry time for contained ophthalmic instruments is feasibly as effective as full-cycle sterilization for contained instruments using the AMSCO autoclave. For sequential same-day ophthalmic procedures, wet instruments sterilized by a short-cycle process with an interrupted dry time can remain sterile for at least 3 minutes if kept in a covered sterilizer containment device. One guideline recommends that wrapped or unwrapped ophthalmic instruments sterilized by a short-cycle process without full drying should be stored in a covered containment device until retrieved by staff wearing sterile gloves and gowns in the operating room for the subsequent surgery after a short delay. Phaco handpieces should be immediately primed with a balanced salt solution and remain wet as they sit on the sterile instrument table. We did not identify any clinical setting evidence from studies or autoclave manufacturers. It is unclear if clinical outcomes differ between patients undergoing sequential same-day ophthalmic surgeries using short-cycle sterilized instruments and those undergoing surgery using full-cycle sterilized instruments. What Does This Mean? Preliminary laboratory evidence and guideline recommendations supporting the use of autoclaves for short-cycle sterilization of instruments for sequential same-day ophthalmic surgeries are available. However, there is no clinical effectiveness evidence available on this process in patient settings. Future research is necessary to understand the clinical safety of using instruments sterilized by short cycles for sequential same-day use for patients undergoing ophthalmic surgeries. In addition to the evidence and recommendations identified, other factors, such as environmental influence, may be useful considerations when making decisions about short-cycle sterilization for sequential same-day instrument use for ophthalmic surgery.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».