@emer-ward
Active 23 hours, 31 minutes agoEmer Ward
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
-
Hi Lenora,
I havent come accross them before but I suppose if they are fully decontaminatable (not a word I know but it should be!) thye should be ok. I looked some up and its hard to see how the would be filled and emptied. They may be more of a H&S risk than IP&C
keep us posed on how you get on
regards
Emer -
Hi Lenora,
i asked about these in WGH.
We only use the Mapleson when transfering a patient to ICU and they are disposed of after use.
the anaesthetic other circuits are used with a distal and a proximal filter and are re sued. the distal filter is disposed of each Friday and re attached on a monday morning. The proximal filter is disposed of after each use.
im not very au fait with the use of anaesthetic machines so I hope this makes sense.
Emer
-
-
-
Hi Tracy,
WGH is considering stopping routine asymptomatic surveillance testing in scheduled and unscheduled admissions. We are getting so many patients testing positive with high CT values and none have turned out to have active infection but most likely post infection. The patients state they had positive antigen tests in the last few weeks but very few have registered them.we have a system of routine covid screening on a designated form which must be completed at least twice a day to help ensure we capture any patients with new symptoms.
I dont think the PPE policy should change just yet. All patient facing staff will continue to wear FFP2’s
we have another few mitigation policies insitu which will help. the national guidelines i think will allow hospitals to risk assess their own environment and data. Almost all of our outbreaks over the past 2 years have occured inthe one area where the environment is particularly challanging so we may do something different there. Im watching a situation there are the moment and the outcome may influence our decision.
Emer
-
-
-
Hi, just wondering if anyone has had a chance to review the new novel coronavirus interim guidelines. I note these guidelines and the accompanying algorithm has changed the type of precautions required from airborne to droplet. Also in the text it doesn’t mention the use of eye protection but it does in the algorithm.
The change to contact & droplet precautions for non AGP care is contrary to the advice from the CDC (3feb) , the ECDC (7 feb) and the UK (3 feb)
Australian advice is a little muddled (7 feb). it advises contact & droplet for mild community cases and contact & airborne for symptoms pneumonia pg 4 and appears to only recommend airborne for AGP on pg 6.
WHO (25 Jan) and Canadian (? date)guidelines only require airborne for AGP.
The level of obvious international debate on the level of protection required is confusing and understandable considering the newness of this virus. It is great to get a national document with which to advise from but I fear it will be a hard sell from us to the staff to change (or “reduce” as they see it) the level of protection offered to them especially when they are aware of higher respiratory protection measures being taken in the UK and other European countries and given that we have provided education and training that on PPE that is not now relevant.
It may be easier to mirror our closest neighbours until there is definitive answers to the commutability of this virus. The WHO is constrained to provide advice of the minimum PPE required due to its global responsibility.
Any thoughts?
Emer
Any thoughts
-
Hi all,
So far I have received 15 responses to the member survey for the professional group. Thanks to those who have completed it but it would be great to get a bigger response. It is imperative we have a good oversight of what are the makeup of IPCT’s nationally.
In order to have a report for the national group I would need to have responses completed by Wednesday 13th November.
Please make every effort to complete the form. If you have difficulty accessing the link please see email of 11th October
regards
Emer
-
Hi all,
So far I have received 15 responses to the member survey for the professional group. Thanks to those who have completed it but it would be great to get a bigger response. It is imperative we have a good oversight of what are the makeup of IPCT’s nationally.
In order to have a report for the national group I would need to have responses completed by Wednesday 13th November.
Please make every effort to complete the form. If you have difficulty accessing the link please see email of 11th October
regards
Emer
-
Hi Sabrina,
any probe that may be exposed to body fluids requires high level disinfection. We had a similar problem in ICU and theatre with the probe used for insertion of CVC’s and at best it got a cats lick and a promise.
We have recently introduced the UV light HLD system Germitec to decontaminate these probes which are being used more and more. The decontamination is carried out by the anaesthetic staff and compliance is monitored at the moment by the CSSD manager. It is planned to include the ‘decontamination confirmed’ sticker generated into the procedure for the insertion of a CVC using the probe thus ensuring compliance.
Regards
Emer
WGH -
-
-
Hi Alison.
We have purchased the UV light HLD system for the decontamination of TV/TR probes and for the central line probe. We can disconnect the central line probe from the machine and this is brought to the X ray department for decontamination at present. I have put in a funding request for additional machines to allow theatre/ICU to have their own dedicated machine. We haven’t had any issues with the machines and the staff seem to like them.
With regard to the TOEs, at present we are continuing with the OPA with the GUS but we are looking at changing. We only do a very small amount of TOE’s are therefore its difficult to justify the expense of the UV machine. There are plans for a national contract for TOE HDL. I’m not in favour of the wipe system as it is too subjective and entirely dependant on the human factor. The welsh guidelines make provision of TOE HDL with chlorine dioxide solution. There is an automated system available called Stella which the welsh make specific reference to. I’m not sure why this chemical in its liquid form was not included in the national guidelines if it is applicable was a wipe. The welsh guidelines do not advocate the use of the wipes as it was this decontamination method (or lack of it!) that lead to the Hep B death.
Regards
Emer -
Hi Alison.
We have purchased the UV light HLD system for the decontamination of TV/TR probes and for the central line probe. We can disconnect the central line probe from the machine and this is brought to the X ray department for decontamination at present. I have put in a funding request for additional machines to allow theatre/ICU to have their own dedicated machine. We haven’t had any issues with the machines and the staff seem to like them.
With regard to the TOEs, at present we are continuing with the OPA with the GUS but we are looking at changing. We only do a very small amount of TOE’s are therefore its difficult to justify the expense of the UV machine. There are plans for a national contract for TOE HDL. I’m not in favour of the wipe system as it is too subjective and entirely dependant on the human factor. The welsh guidelines make provision of TOE HDL with chlorine dioxide solution. There is an automated system available called Stella which the welsh make specific reference to. I’m not sure why this chemical in its liquid form was not included in the national guidelines if it is applicable was a wipe. The welsh guidelines do not advocate the use of the wipes as it was this decontamination method (or lack of it!) that lead to the Hep B death.
Regards
Emer
-
