Healthcare Hygiene magazine August 2020 | Page 22

The ramifications of failure are significant, according to Carr. “When mattress covers fail, body fluids get into the mattress, which is evident when we cut it open. Flooring is another common failure, results in using duct tape and other stop-gap measures that are unsightly and difficult to clean.” The challenge is that the dangers of these failures aren’t necessarily on the radar of busy clinicians who are preoccupied with their patient-care responsibilities, and if the problems persist without being addressed properly, they become expensive for the healthcare institution to correct. “I think clinicians are generally not aware of surface material compatibility issuesCarr adds. “We also must contend with equipment cleaning issues and variation around that as well. Adding various surface cleaning nuances seems unrealistic. We shouldn’t rely on clinicians to become familiar with the variations on how to clean different surfaces, we should fix the surfaces.” Experts agree that materials matter—designing and sourcing devices made from disinfectant-compatible polymers reduces HAIs, lowers the cost of ownership for healthcare providers and, most importantly, improves the patient experience. Minimizing surface damage is important in the healthcare setting because damaged equipment can hide pathogens, be very costly to replace and affect the overall image of a hospital. The pathogen threat is continuing to evolve, and disinfectants must stand up to the toughest pathogens. The challenge is that more powerful disinfectants are also typically associated with poor surface compatibility, because the very ingredients that break down pathogens can break down other things as well. This can put the healthcare professional in a difficult spot of making trade-offs between efficacy or compatibility. Replacing damaged equipment adds unnecessary costs to facilities when most are already financially constrained. Surface damage like discoloration, cracks, residue, and stickiness, can negatively affect patient perception of the facility. Anecdotally, facility staff often have makeshift “solutions” for handling equipment that has cracked or became discolored due to disinfectant use. This highlights the fact that healthcare professionals are aware of these problems but sometimes feel resigned or powerless about finding solutions. The compatibility issue was addressed in ECRI Institute’s report, Top 10 Health Technology Hazards for 2017, which described device failures caused by cleaning products and practices: “The use of cleaning agents or cleaning practices that are incompatible with the materials used in a medical device’s construction, or that are otherwise inappropriate for the device’s design, can cause the device to malfunction or to fail prematurely, possibly affecting patient care.” Specifically, the ECRI Institute report noted: • Repeated use of incompatible cleaning agents can damage equipment surfaces and degrade plastics, often resulting in device breakage—possibly with no visible warning signs. • The use of improper cleaning practices can damage seals, degrade lubricants, and cause fluid intrusion. This can result in damage to electronics, power supplies, and motors. The report adds, “Because there is no single cleaner or cleaning process that will work with all devices, hospitals must stock and use multiple cleaning products and familiarize staff with device-specific cleaning methods—tasks that pose a significant burden. Nevertheless, failure to do so can lead to ineffective cleaning (a potentially deadly circumstance), as well Continued from Page 20 external ventricular drain devices. These devices attach to a catheter inserted into the ventricle of the brain and drain excess CSF to limit intracranial pressure. There was a stopcock on the device that was constantly breaking off, potentially allowing pathogens to enter the system and cause a brain infection. The broken stopcocks also caused the CSF to drain too rapidly and disabled the monitoring of the intracranial pressure. We filed a number of FDA Medwatch reports and worked with the manufacturer to solve the problem. Eventually the manufacturer came out with a much stronger stopcock that eliminated the breakage problem we were seeing. Not only did this solve the problem for our facility, but for everyone who uses that product. Another example: Years ago, we investigated an overdose involving a syringe pump. At some point our infection prevention department had introduced a new disinfectant cleaner that was more effective at killing TB and other nasty hospital germs. The new cleaner was not compatible with the plastic material used on the syringe pump and caused rapid disintegration of the pump parts. The pump involved in the incident was missing a part on the syringe saddle that caused the pump to incorrectly sense the syringe size. The pump now sensed a 30ml syringe when a 60ml syringe was actually installed. This caused the pump to deliver two times the intended dose of morphine. Luckily there was no permanent patient harm, but it could have easily been fatal. Following that event, we did a series of tests and eventually found a disinfectant product that killed the required germs and at the same time was compatible with the pump materials. While the situation has improved over the years, this is still a constant problem. We also frequently find cases of poor human factors design with equipment that results in “user error.” While it’s easy for manufacturers to blame the users, the design of hardware and software often makes certain types of mistakes much more likely. In our response to the COVID-19 pandemic, our engineers used 3-D printers and laser cutters to make face shields and parts for our CAPR helmets that were desperately needed. We also assisted in setting up new “surge” units for COVID-19 patients and evaluated various methods of decontaminating N95 masks. HHM How can clinicians/risk managers/value analysis professionals and other stakeholders improve their communication and collaboration with biomedical engineers? RF: In most cases, I think they just have to ask. Like everyone else in the hospital, the engineers are very busy but willing to help, especially when it comes to improving patient safety. Problem solving is our business. HHM What can everyone do to ensure the best clinical/operational/fiscal outcomes relating to devices/ equipment? RF: Do your homework before purchasing equipment. There are many resources such as the FDA and ECRI that can help you find out if a particular model or device has a bad track record. Report problems! We can’t solve a problem if we don’t know about it. While we may not be able to solve all problems, we can certainly help avoid common ones. The squeaky wheel gets the oil. 22 august 2020 • www.healthcarehygienemagazine.com