Lately in work, I brought to the attention of my senior, the "need-to-improve" infection control practice of the anaesthetist in theatre.
To me, placing a sterile bung (cover) at the end of a syringe to stop it from getting contaminated makes sense, infection-control-wise. So that when you administer the medicine to the patient, the possibility of infection risk to the patient is even more minimized compared to when you did not cover the syringe. Although, yes it is clean, but when you put a bung on it while lying on the counter waiting to be used, the possibility of infection is even lessened than when you did not cover it. To me, that was common sense.
Besides, what was the reason that it couldn't be done? If it was an emergency and there was no time, fine. That is acceptable. You gotta have your priorities right. Save the life first and we can worry about infection later. But on an 8-hour procedure, one has the time to cover syringes, surely. So it awfully looks to me like sheer laziness. To me that is not acceptable.
It took my seniours a long while to respond. Then they called the Infection Control Nurse of the Trust. Guess what she told me...
We need to gather more evidence that, "not putting a bung on a syringe", is an infection risk.
And I was dismissed. Ok...... Guess, that infection control nurse when I was a student was wrong....??
This is where you think for yourself....
For me, if I were the patient, I would rather that the doctors cover the syringes with a sterile bung to minimise the risk of infection to me.
Posts
