ArticleScientific reports2024
Design and validation of a method for evaluating medical device cleanliness by recovering and quantifying residual proteins on stainless plates.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We recently reported a method for recovering and quantifying residual proteins bound to surfaces of various medical instruments via thermal coagulation under neutral pH and room temperature. The method effectively recovered and solubilised coagulated proteins at high temperatures in dry and humid conditions, with a protein recovery rate of > 90%. This study validated the previous method by comparing residual protein recovery from test samples using a conventional extraction solution (1% SDS, [pH 11.0]) and proposed solution (1% SDS, 10 mM TCEP, and 10 mM HEPES [pH 7.0]). To mimic soiled medical equipment, pseudo-blood-contaminated stainless steel plates were prepared. Residual protein was recovered using conventional and proposed solutions under varying temperature and humidity conditions. Quantitative protein recovery limits were determined at nine facilities. Compared with the conventional solution, the proposed solution recovered proteins more effectively from samples processed at temperatures > 60 °C. However, low recovery rates were observed for samples processed at 95 °C, possibly owing to differences in protein adhesion due to sample and plate-surface properties. Our findings present a method for quantifying residual proteins on medical instruments exposed to high temperatures during use or disinfection. Further studies should standardise test soiling conditions, materials, and solutions to evaluate cleaning methods.
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.