Indian Journal of Anaesthesia  
About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions
Home | Login  | Users Online: 1468  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size    


ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 61  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 245-249

Disinfection of laryngoscopes: A survey of practice


Department of Anaesthesiology, Seth G. S. Medical College and KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Vaishali Prabhakar Chaskar
1303, Balaji Avenue co-op Hsg Soc., Plot No. 30, Sector 36, Kamothe, Navi Mumbai - 410 209, Maharashtra
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ija.IJA_347_16

Rights and Permissions

Background and Aims: The laryngoscope is a common piece of equipment used by anaesthesiologists. It has been identified as a potential source of cross infection. Although guidelines exist regarding appropriate disinfection practices, recent reviews suggest ineffectiveness of current methods of disinfection and poor compliance with the established protocols. We conducted a questionnaire-based survey to study the current disinfection practices being followed by a cross section of anaesthesiologists. Methods: A simple questionnaire containing 13 questions was distributed amongst anaesthesiologists in an anaesthesia conference. Data were analysed with percentage analysis. Results: Out of 250 delegates who attended the conference, 150 submitted the completed questionnaires. Residents constituted 41% and 46% were consultants. Eighteen (12%) used only tap water for cleaning and 132 (88%) used a chemical agent after rinsing with water. Out of 132, 76 (51%) used detergent/soap solution, 29 (19%) would wash and then soak in disinfectant or germicidal agents (glutaraldehyde, povidone iodine and chlorhexidine) and 18 (12%) would wipe the blade with an alcohol swab. With respect to disinfection of laryngoscope handles, 70% respondents said they used an alcohol swab, 18% did not use any method, 9% were not aware of the method being used, while 3% did not respond. Conclusion: Our results indicate wide variation in methods of decontamination of laryngoscopes. Awareness regarding laryngoscope as a potential source of infection was high. We need to standardise and implement guidelines on a national level and make available resources which will help to improve patient safety.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed449    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded101    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal