Sterilization and decontamination practices are essential for risk minimization and overall safety. In case the necessary measures are not applied, microbial contamination can occur. As a result, the process may lead to the transmission of certain diseases and infections, which would negatively impact the well-being of the general population. This is why evidence-based practices are included when it comes to reducing cases of surgical site infections.
In the case study on decontamination, the circumstances highlight the fact that the instruments in the OR were dirty. The issue may have been caused by problems during one or more decontamination practices required for instruments, including running them through a washer, inspecting them, autoclaving, and storing them (Rowinski and von Schreeb 645). The requirements for decontamination were not followed, which may have resulted in risks for patients (Owusu et al. 81). The sterile processing department is to monitor which step of the process requires additional focus in case individuals improperly use the washers, autoclaves, or store the instruments. As highlighted prior in regard to the decontamination process, multiple elements are to be considered. Extra efforts in monitoring potential issues with the equipment or the workforce are needed to prevent risks.
The case study on sterilization illustrates circumstances in which the sterilized loads are moist. The loads might be wet due to the low-quality packing material, inappropriate loading, issues with the equipment, low steam quality, and similar circumstances (Panta et al.). Kristine is to ensure the equipment is not faulty or that the materials that are used are efficient. Wet loads are sterilized packages containing moisture. The issue can affect the operating room by causing risks of surgical site infections and the sterile processing department by illustrating existing problems. Kristine is to ensure all the necessary measures for sterilization are followed on all levels.
The case studies highlight situations in which sterilization and decontamination are not fully functional. As a result, additional measures are to be implemented to generate risk reductions. On the contrary, not following the protocol correlates with negative consequences both for patients as well as the medical institutions in which the sterilization steps are not implemented or followed.
Works Cited
Owusu, Enid, et al. “Bacterial Contamination of Surgical Instruments Used at the Surgery Department of a Major Teaching Hospital in a Resource-Limited Country: An Observational Study.” Diseases, vol. 10, no. 4, 2022, p. 81.
Panta, Gopal, et al. “Compliance of Primary and Secondary Care Public Hospitals with Standard Practices for Reprocessing and Steam Sterilization of Reusable Medical Devices in Nepal: Findings from Nation-Wide Multicenter Clustered Audits.” BMC Health Services Research, vol. 20, no. 1, 2020.
Rowinski, Anna, and Johan Von Schreeb. “Decontamination of Surgical Instruments for Safe Wound Care Surgeries in Disasters: What Are the Options? A Scoping Review.” Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, vol. 36, no. 5, 2021, pp. 645–650.