BACKGROUND: Materials for wrapping sterile items continue to evolve, but evaluation of such products under clinical conditions is rare. The purpose of the current study was to test a new product before introducing it to the hospital's sterilizing processing unit. METHODS: Four hundred packs containing 1199 items were prepared. Half were wrapped in linen and Kimguard sterile wrap (Kimberley-Clark Australia Pty, Ltd; Queensland, Australia), and half were wrapped in Kimguard One-Step sterile wrap (Kimberley-Clark). They were stored on shelves in 4 areas in the hospital. Items from the packs were periodically tested in the laboratory to evaluate shelf life. Time of wrapping was measured on a series of 50 packs (25 using each product), wrapped by 1 experienced person. These were unwrapped by an operating room nurse, and, again, the process was timed. RESULTS: Bacteria were cultured from 20 (1.7%) of the 1157 test items. There were no differences on this measure between the 2 products (P = .64). Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus was the most frequent isolate, accounting for 40% of the positive results. The average time taken to wrap the test tray with the double wrap was 56.4 seconds compared with 32.4 seconds with the single wrap (P < or = .000). Unwrapping the single pack (5.02 seconds) was also faster than unwrapping the double-wrap pack (6.92 seconds; P = .000). CONCLUSIONS: Wrapping sterile items using Kimguard one-step sterile wrap carries no greater risk of bacterial contamination than double-wrap methods and may lead to significant cost savings in both labor (time to wrap) and consumables (linen and recycling costs).
BACKGROUND: Materials for wrapping sterile items continue to evolve, but evaluation of such products under clinical conditions is rare. The purpose of the current study was to test a new product before introducing it to the hospital's sterilizing processing unit. METHODS: Four hundred packs containing 1199 items were prepared. Half were wrapped in linen and Kimguard sterile wrap (Kimberley-Clark Australia Pty, Ltd; Queensland, Australia), and half were wrapped in Kimguard One-Step sterile wrap (Kimberley-Clark). They were stored on shelves in 4 areas in the hospital. Items from the packs were periodically tested in the laboratory to evaluate shelf life. Time of wrapping was measured on a series of 50 packs (25 using each product), wrapped by 1 experienced person. These were unwrapped by an operating room nurse, and, again, the process was timed. RESULTS: Bacteria were cultured from 20 (1.7%) of the 1157 test items. There were no differences on this measure between the 2 products (P = .64). Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus was the most frequent isolate, accounting for 40% of the positive results. The average time taken to wrap the test tray with the double wrap was 56.4 seconds compared with 32.4 seconds with the single wrap (P < or = .000). Unwrapping the single pack (5.02 seconds) was also faster than unwrapping the double-wrap pack (6.92 seconds; P = .000). CONCLUSIONS: Wrapping sterile items using Kimguard one-step sterile wrap carries no greater risk of bacterial contamination than double-wrap methods and may lead to significant cost savings in both labor (time to wrap) and consumables (linen and recycling costs).
Authors: Erinn C Rowe; Scott W Savage; William A Rutala; David J Weber; Maria Gergen-Teague; Stephen F Eckel Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2012-06-12 Impact factor: 3.840