Barrier properties and cost implications of a single versus a double wrap for storing sterile instrument packs
Webster, Joan, Radke, Elinor, George, Narelle, Faoagali, Joan, & Harris, Mary (2005) Barrier properties and cost implications of a single versus a double wrap for storing sterile instrument packs. American Journal of Infection Control, 33(6), pp. 348-352.
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 ≤ .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).
Impact and interest:
Citation counts are sourced monthly from and citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
Full-text downloads displays the total number of times this work’s files (e.g., a PDF) have been downloaded from QUT ePrints as well as the number of downloads in the previous 365 days. The count includes downloads for all files if a work has more than one.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Keywords:||sterile instrument packs, Kimguard One, Step Sterile Wrap, double, wrap methods|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES (110000) > NURSING (111000)|
|Divisions:||Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Health|
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2005 Elsevier|
|Copyright Statement:||Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher.|
|Deposited On:||13 Mar 2006|
|Last Modified:||29 Feb 2012 13:11|
Repository Staff Only: item control page