本文選題：管腔器械 + 氣槍��； 參考：《中國消毒學(xué)雜志》2017年02期

【摘要】：目的比較不同方法干燥管腔器械的效果。方法將300件管腔器械(包括腔鏡器械、超聲刀和氣腹管)分為3組,每組100件,完成終末清洗后,在溫度恒定條件下,用氣槍或干布將器械表面水分擦去,干燥時(shí)間均為25 min。A組采用溫度設(shè)為70℃普通醫(yī)用高溫干燥柜干燥;B組采用溫度設(shè)為70℃普通醫(yī)用高溫干燥柜加高壓氣槍吹干燥;C組采用新型低溫真空干燥柜干燥。運(yùn)用目測(cè)法和物理方法比較3種方法的干燥效果。結(jié)果 A組36%管腔器械干燥后有少量殘留水份;B組18%管腔器械干燥后有少量的殘留水份;C組1%管腔器械干燥后有少量殘留水份。結(jié)論 C組采用新型的低溫真空干燥技術(shù)優(yōu)于A、B組傳統(tǒng)的干燥柜技術(shù),值得臨床推廣。
[Abstract]:Objective to compare the effects of different methods for drying lumen instruments. Methods 300 lumen instruments (including endoscopic instruments, ultrasonic knives and pneumoperitoneal tubes) were divided into 3 groups, 100 in each group. After finishing the final cleaning, the surface moisture of the instruments was erased with air gun or dry cloth under constant temperature. The drying time was 25 min.A. The drying temperature of medical high temperature drying cabinet was 70 鈩，

本文編號(hào)：2110690