INSTRUMENT DECONTAMINATION
Above: Wayne Spencer and Sulisti Holmes.
colonised with methicillin-resistant clone Staphylococcus capitis NRCS-A after the disinfection procedure. The reality is that decontamination is often performed in crowded facilities, with little worktop space, in one sink/drainer, so it is impossible to have a defined ‘dirty to clean’ flow. There are lots of other problematic
items throughout healthcare too – including pulse oximeters, BP cuffs, physio equipment, thermostat knobs on splint pans, seating in showers, mattresses, pillows, clipper handles, blood glucose monitors, hoists, baby scales, EBM kit, bodies of tympanic thermometers, doppler probes, ultrasound keypads/ rollerballs, IT tablets, IT mice, burns hydrotherapy baths, supports for single- use bedpans, theatre gel limb supports, commodes, over-bed tables, wheelchairs, ice machines, calculators, laryngoscope bodies, privacy screens, patient trollies, and many more... The problem, he explained, is that items
are often designed for function – all too often, decontamination is an afterthought. He warned that decontamination of equipment on the wards is currently inadequate – often taking place in poor local facilities, rather than specialist units. Training is also variable. Ward staff do not receive good training on decontamination.
The future “The question is: how much of this equipment could be reprocessed by specialists? A few years ago, it was unheard of for an endoscope to leave the endoscopy unit; now they are sent to a unit for specialist decontamination,” Peter Hoffman commented. He added that there may even be the potential for an SSD outreach on the wards. “We need to start thinking about
where the problems are, and how decontamination experts can contribute to solving those problems,” he continued. He called for manufacturers to have a
role in developing devices that are easier to decontaminate, but added that the UK is a small player in the global market, so it is difficult to exert influence on the sector. In his closing comments, he said that decontamination of medical devices, and the environment, remain problematic – most of the easy problems have been addressed. “We must maintain vigilance on
sterilisation, but we must continue to look for where the problems are,” he concluded.
Do we need independent AE(D)s? The event also debated whether hospitals lack the expertise to function safely without an independent Authorised Engineer (Decontamination) [AE(D)]. Sulisti Holmes, the Strategic Lead for
Medical Device Safety for NHS Scotland, argued that hospitals do need an independent AE(D) to safely function, while Wayne Spencer, AE(D), and convenor of the ISO TC 198 Working Group 12 (responsible for ISO 17664 for reprocessing instructions), argued that hospitals do not need independent AE(D)s to safely function. During the light-hearted duel between
the two experts, Sulisti Holmes joked that the AE(D) is like the ‘Mary Berry of the decontamination world’. Both carry out inspections, ensuring a good quality product with ‘no soggy bottoms’. She argued that AE(D)s are mentioned frequently in the decontamination guidance – in the event of an incident, you will be asked: “Why didn’t you follow the guidance and listen to the expertise of the AE(D)?” she pointed out. In addition, AE(D)s can have an important role to play in learning from incidents – after all, as the philosopher, George Santayana, is quoted as saying: ‘those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it’. The need for earlier engagement of
expertise was highlighted during a public inquiry into an incident involving the contamination of the water supply at the newly built Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Glasgow in 2017. A ten-year-old girl tragically died after a Hickman line became
September 2022 Health Estate Journal 29
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112
