SUBMIT YOUR QUESTIONS: editor@hpnonline.com


STERILE PROCESSING INSIGHTS Marking tape - yay or nay? by Stephen M. Kovach


Q A


“We just had a surveyor come and tell us we cannot use marking tape. Have you heard that marking tape cannot be used any more for identifying instruments?”


To my knowledge, I have not heard or read anything stating that you cannot


use marking tape or any other means of identifying surgical instruments. My fi rst response to you is to ask the surveyor to produce some type of evidence that states you cannot use marking tape on your instruments.


Now, they might cite you for not using


marking tape properly, and that is a dif- ferent reason.


Over the years, there have been many


methods used to mark surgical instruments. Based on my observations, marking tape has been the most popular followed by a “color-coded dipping method.” New and possible better methods are on the horizon. First, whatever technique is being used to help identify surgical instruments, it should be done according to the Instructions for Use (IFU) of the product you are using. Be sure to consult them before doing any marking. In general, any method used should not impede the reprocessing of the medical device. In the last few years, medical device reprocessing departments have had more options to mark medical devices to help in traceability or the total instrument sets, and to help ensure that sets are kept together during the reprocessing of those devices. Let’s look at taping and dipping, and then some of the other options medical device reprocessing depart- ment have for use. Taping and dipping will wear out over time. Staff needs to inspect them each time they touch the instrument and check the integrity of the product according to the IFU. This is part of the inspection of each instru- ment that should include looking for any worn out tape and replacing it (as well as examining the


Pictures of bad taping and dipping.


dipping coating for any cracking/fl aking), and sending the instrument out for repair, as necessary.


The color-dipping method is done by the product manufacturer of the surgical instru- ment or by a third party. When tape is fi rst applied, it must “cure,”


[a chemical process to let the tape set and/ or be sterilized], and I do not see that hap- pening all the time. I see staff just apply new tape on the instrument and put it back in the set. This means tape not applied properly— or not removed when it should be—may become a potential source of infections. Thus, instruments should be cleaned fi rst


before tape is applied for the fi rst time, then it can be sterilized and put into service. I’ve witnessed too many times where staff will just remove old tape and apply new tape. This is not correct. When applying instru- ment tape, the IFU must be followed to get the proper usage and life from the product. If departments do not want to use taping or dipping, there are other options (e.g., laser/acid etching, color silicone bands, etc.). Departments also must consider the initiative that the United States (U.S.) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) established called the Unique Device Identification (UDI) system to adequately identify medi- cal devices sold in the United States from


manufacturers because this process might offer some new techniques able to help that have not been available before. As with any method, each has its advantages and disad- vantages, and each department should use their critical thinking skills to determine what method is the best for their needs. In thinking back to your original comment, this might make sense. Perhaps one or two (or a combination) of different things may have happened at your facility to tip the surveyor off. They might have seen some poorly taped instruments inclining them to comment not to tape your instruments; or maybe they asked if you have a policy on taping and you did not, therefore stating you “… cannot use marking tape.” Regardless of whichever method a depart-


ment uses to help identify surgical instru- ments, a department should have a policy in place with its staff effi ciently trained in how to follow it. I remember these two quotes concerning policy and procedures: “Walk your talk.” (You may know this as, “Practice what you preach.”)


“If you cannot speak to a policy or proce- dure, you do not have one to follow.” In closing, the one method that should not be used is engraving. Why? Because it can harm the surface of the medical device, pro- mote corrosion, and (possibly) decrease the passivation layer of the medical device. HPN


References:


1. Kraayenbrink, M., Baer, S. T., Jenkins, J. G., & Moore-Gillon, V. (1987). Serious hazard of plastic coding tape on surgical instruments. The British Journal of Surgery, 74(8), 696. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.1800740815.


2. Ipaktchi, K., Kolnik, A., & Messina, M. (2013). Current surgical instrument labeling techniques may increase the risk of unintentionally retained foreign objects: a hypoth- esis. Patient Saf Surg, 7(31), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1754- 9493-7-31.


3. Kostyal, D. A., Verhage, J. M., Beezhold, D. H., & Beck, W. C. (1993). Flash sterilization and instrument tape--an experi- mental study: Journal of healthcare materiel management, Oct;11(9), 34-5. PMID: 10129224. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/10129224/.


4. AAMI (2020). ANSI/AAMI ST79: 2017 Comprehensive guide to steam sterilization and sterility assurance in healthcare facilities (7.4.1 - General considerations for all devices and utensils, 40), Amendment A.2 (2020). Arlington, VA: As- sociation for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation.


Photos courtesy Stephen Kovach


5. Samit, A., Dodson, R. (1983). Instrument-marking Tapes: An Unnecessary Hazard. J Oral Maxillofacial Surg, Oct;41, 687-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(83)90029-0.


hpnonline.com • HEALTHCARE PURCHASING NEWS • June 2023 45


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