1 0 6 • O U T PA T I E N T S U R G E R Y M A G A Z I N E • A U G U S T 2 0 1 7
Although central sterile techs have
their hands full turning around flex-
ible endoscopes and cannulated
drill bits for speedy re-use, the
challenges extend far beyond
lumened instruments. Even seem-
ingly straightforward surgical
instruments may pose an infection
risk, says Laura E. Staubitz, MEd, BSN, RN, CIC.
Ms. Staubitz, an infection prevention practitioner with
Providence St. Peter Hospital in Olympia, Wash., is a firm propo-
nent of following instructions for use when it comes to reprocess-
ing each manufacturer's instruments. But she also recalls one
instance in which "going against the grain" was an acceptable
course of action.
It was 2014, when she was with CHI Franciscan Health, and a
surgical tech was having trouble cleaning a particular rongeur, so
he went against the manufacturer's IFUs by opening up the
rongeur to make sure it was free of bioburden. Long story short:
It wasn't.
"Inside there was a lot of bioburden," she says. "It was pretty
shocking."
The facility responded by pulling the particular rongeur from
use, and it also filed a MAUDE (Manufacturer and User Facility
Device Experience) report with the FDA, which feeds a public
database of adverse events involving medical devices. In the
process, the facility learned that at least one other facility had
FRONTLINE FAITH
Taking Initiative in Central Sterile
• ENGAGED Dedicated sterile techs may help to identify
instruments whose design may pose unanticipated reprocessing challenges.