Audit of nasendoscope disinfection practice.
BACKGROUND
Several options exist with regard to flexible pharyngo-laryngoscope sterilisation. We audited the use of disposable sheaths in our department over a six-month period.


METHODS
A cost-analysis was performed and the advantages and disadvantages of this system were compared with several alternative options.


RESULTS
We found that the overall cost of disposable sheaths averaged ł4008 per month over a six-month period. We subsequently introduced chlorine dioxide (ClO2) wipes as a means of disinfection. Chlorine dioxide wipes have enabled a monthly saving of ł3145 over sheath usage. Additionally, they meet health regulation requirements and are a convenient, cost-effective alternative to sheaths.


CONCLUSIONS
The limiting factors, including time and financial issues, involved in nasendoscope disinfection are discussed.


CONCLUSIONS
We have found chlorine dioxide wipes to be a satisfactory alternative means of nasendoscope disinfection. Possible time constraints aside, there are no advantages of sheath use over our current method. Chlorine dioxide wipes are also preferable from a financial point of view.
Street
I
I
ENT Department, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, UK. ianstreet@doctors.org.uk
Hamann
J
J
Harries
M
M
D017046:Cost Savings; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D004203:Disinfection / Q000191:economics* / Q000379:methods*; D004209:Disposable Equipment; D004866:Equipment Contamination / Q000517:prevention & control; D006801:Humans; D020704:Laryngoscopes / Q000191:economics / Q000382:microbiology*; D007828:Laryngoscopy; D008485:Medical Audit; D006113:United Kingdom