Related Experiment Videos
Asepsis and out-patient cystoscopy
British Journal of Urology
|December 1, 1983
Abstract:
Cystoscopy was performed on a control group of 74 patients under full sterile precautions and on a study group of 83 patients under aseptic conditions, which required fewer materials. The incidence of urinary infections in the two groups was 4 and 6% respectively; this difference is not statistically significant. Rigors were rare in both groups (1%). The financial savings achieved by using an aseptic technique for out-patient cystoscopy are discussed.
Insights
Aseptic techniques for outpatient cystoscopy are as safe as sterile procedures, with no significant difference in infection rates. This method offers potential financial savings for healthcare.
Area of Science:
- Urology
- Infectious Disease Prevention
Background:
- Sterile precautions are standard for invasive procedures like cystoscopy.
- Aseptic techniques may reduce material usage and costs.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy and safety of aseptic versus sterile techniques for outpatient cystoscopy.
- To evaluate the incidence of urinary tract infections and rigors in both groups.
Main Methods:
- Cystoscopy was performed on two groups: a control group (n=74) using sterile precautions and a study group (n=83) using aseptic conditions.
- Infection rates and rigors were monitored and compared between the groups.
Main Results:
- Urinary infection incidence was 4% in the sterile group and 6% in the aseptic group, a difference not statistically significant.
- Rigors were infrequent, occurring in only 1% of patients in both groups.
Conclusions:
- Aseptic technique is a viable and safe alternative to full sterile precautions for outpatient cystoscopy.
- Implementing aseptic techniques can lead to significant financial savings in healthcare settings.