Transvaginal ultrasound probes are human papillomavirus-free following low-level disinfection: cross-sectional multicenter survey

Time-effectiveness and convenience of transvaginal ultrasound probe disinfection using ultraviolet vs chlorine dioxide multistep wipe system: prospective survey study

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficiency, ease of use and user satisfaction of two methods of transvaginal ultrasound probe high-level disinfection: ultraviolet-C radiation (UV-C) and a chlorine dioxide multistep wipe system.

METHODS

This was a prospective survey study. UV-C units were introduced into a busy early pregnancy assessment service and compared with a multiwipe system for disinfection. Before seeing each patient, healthcare professionals (HCPs) measured with a stopwatch the time taken to complete a cycle of disinfection using either UV-C or chlorine dioxide multistep wipes and responded to a quick-response (QR) code-linked survey. Additional essential tasks that could be completed before seeing the next patient during probe disinfection were also documented. Using another QR code-linked survey, data on ease of use, satisfaction with the system used and preferred system were collected. The ease of use and satisfaction with the system were rated on a 0 to 10 Likert scale (0 poor, 10 excellent). A free-text section for comments was then completed.

RESULTS

Disinfection using UV-C (n = 331) was 60% faster than the chlorine dioxide multiwipe system (n = 332) (101 vs 250 s; P < 0.0001). A greater number of tasks were completed during probe disinfection when using UV-C, saving a further 74 s per patient (P < 0.0001). The HCPs using UV-C (n = 71) reported greater ease of use (median Likert score, 10 vs 3; P < 0.0001) and satisfaction (median Likert score, 10 vs 2; P < 0.0001) compared with those using the multiwipe system (n = 43). HCPs reported that the chlorine dioxide system was time-consuming and environmentally unfriendly, while the UV-C system was efficient and easy to use. Overall, 98% of the HCPs preferred using the UV-C system.

CONCLUSIONS

UV-C technology is more time-efficient and allows more essential tasks to be completed during disinfection. For a 4-h ultrasound list of 15 patients, the use of UV-C would save 55 min 45 s. HCPs found UV-C preferable and easier to use. © 2021 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Endocavity Ultrasound Transducers: Why High-Level Disinfection Is Necessary

As a medical imaging modality, ultrasound is used by a wide cross-section of practitioners including radiologists, obstetricians, gynecologists, gastroenterologists, urologists and cardiologists. The increasing popularity of ultrasound as a diagnostic tool is due not only to the ease of use and portability of systems, but also to the perceived safety aspect of the examination. This latter point needs to be examined. As with any reusable medical device, the ultrasound transducer, also known as a probe, could potentially be a vector for the transmission of pathogenic viruses and fungi between patients if not correctly disinfected after each use. This transmission risk is magnified for an endocavity transducer that has come in contact with the vagina, anal canal or oral cavity, as it could be contaminated with organisms transmitted by blood or mucosal, genital or rectal secretions. Based on the Spaulding system, transducers that come in contact with mucous membranes are classified as semi-critical devices that require high-level disinfection (HLD) after each patient procedure. This HLD process should eliminate all microorganisms except high numbers of bacterial endospores. Only a small number of countries worldwide have implemented transducer reprocessing guidelines that adhere to the Spaulding classification and recommend HLD for endocavity transducers. Overall, there is a lack of conformity among global health agencies regarding the use of HLD for endocavity transducers. This is primarily due to the perception that the infection transmission risk is negligible and that if an endocavity transducer has been covered with a single-use sheath for the procedure, then low-level disinfection provides sufficient protection against pathogen transmission. The objective of this study was to review the published risk of infection transmission from endocavity transducers. By highlighting the outbreaks and case reports that implicate pathogen transmission from transducers, we posit that HLD should be a global standard of practice for the reprocessing of endocavity transducers. It requires substantial time for national health administrations to develop and legislate new recommendations, and for practice changes to be accepted and implemented by healthcare providers. We recommend that Joint Commission International (JCI) and other equivalent organizations enforce the use of HLD of endocavity ultrasound transducers during their accreditation reviews.

Minimizing cross transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in obstetric ultrasound during COVID-19 pandemic

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)-associated infection (COVID-19) is affecting populations worldwide. This statement may serve as guidance for infection prevention and safe ultrasound practices during the COVID-19 pandemic. Ultrasound examination is a fundamental part of obstetric care, yet it is a potential vector for transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Decontamination methods should always be implemented for ultrasound equipment, especially in the presence of suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases. There must be workflow policies to protect pregnant women and healthcare providers from nosocomial cross transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Cleaning and disinfecting of equipment must be in accordance with their potential of pathogen transmission. Consider using telemedicine and genetic technologies as an adjunctive of obstetric ultrasound to reduce patient crowding. Patient triage and education of healthcare providers of infection prevention are crucial to minimize cross contamination of SARS-CoV-2 during obstetric ultrasound.