ArticleClinical endoscopy2018
Experimental Study to Develop a Method for Improving Sample Collection to Monitor Laryngoscopes after Reprocessing.
Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomimetic Mustard Seed-Inspired Brush-Free Alternative for Effective Endoscope Channel Cleaning and Decontamination.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A prospective, quasi-experimental study on the efficacy of a novel double-headed endoscope cleaning brush for cleaning flexible endoscopes.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Using Microbiological Sampling to Evaluate the Efficacy of Nasofibroscope Disinfection: The Tristel Trio Wipes System in Ear-Nose-Throat (ENT) Endoscopy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- What is the Best Sampling Method to Monitor the Effect of Endoscopy Reprocessing?Clinical endoscopy · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsThe microbiological surveillance of endoscopes and automated flexible endoscope reprocessing have been proven to be two of the most difficult and controversial areas of infection control in endoscopy. The purpose of this study was to standardize a sampling method for assessing the effectiveness of standard reprocessing operating procedures for flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopes (FFLs).
methodsFirst, the sampling devices were directly inoculated with Bacillus atrophaeus spores; second, tissue non tissue (TNT) wipes were tested on artificially contaminated surfaces and on FFLs.
resultsComparison of the sponges, cellulose, and TNT wipes indicated that the TNT wipes were more effective in releasing spores (93%) than the sponges (49%) and cellulose wipes (52%). The developed protocol provides a high efficiency for both collection and extraction from the stainless steel surface (87% of the spores were removed and released) and from the FFL (85% of the spores were removed and released), with relatively low standard deviations for recovery efficiency, particularly for the analysis of the FFL.
conclusionTNT wipes are more efficient for sampling surface areas, thereby aiding in the accuracy and reproducibility of environmental surveillance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.