Two serial check valves can prevent cross-contamination through intravenous tubing during total intravenous anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Nonsterile handling of propofol for anesthesia has been linked with severe sepsis and death. Placing a single check valve in the IV tubing does not prevent retrograde ascension of pathogens into propofol-filled syringes, so we designed an IV tubing set with multiple check valves. To estimate the efficacy of this design, we measured the concentration of pathogens detected upstream in the IV tubing in relation to the pathogen concentration in a model of a contaminated patient. METHODS: A glass container with a rubber sealed port was filled with a suspension of either bacteria or phagocytes and kept at 37°C ("contaminated patient" model). A bag of normal saline was connected to an IV cannula, punctured through the rubber sealed port of the patient model. Two additional sidestream infusion lines were connected to syringes in 2 standard infusion pumps. One of the syringes contained propofol and the other contained normal saline as a substitute for an opioid preparation. After 5 hours of infusion, we obtained samples from different parts of the infusion lines and syringes. The samples were streaked out on blood agar plates and incubated at 37°C for 24 hours. We repeated this experiment with 6 different pathogens. RESULTS: We incubated 825 agar plates. Whereas the concentration of bacteria and phagocytes in the "patient" had significantly increased during the 5-hour experiments (positive control), no bacterial growth could be detected in any of the incubated plates. CONCLUSION: The data from this experimental setting suggest that the design with multiple check valves in paired configuration prevents retrograde contamination. Of note, this does not permit the reuse of propofol syringes because reusing is against the manufacturer's recommendations.

Clinical value of acoustic voice measures: a retrospective study.

Within this study a retrospective analysis of clinical voice perturbation measures, Dysphonia Severity Index and subjective perceived hoarseness was performed to determine their value under clinical aspects. The study included the data of 580 healthy and 1,700 pathologic voices, which were investigated under the following aspects. The relevant parameters were identified and their interrelation determined. Group differences between healthy and pathologic voices were figured out and investigated if voice quality measures allowed an automatic diagnosis of voice disorders. The analysis revealed significant changes between the clinical groups, which indicate the diagnostic relevance of voice quality measures. However, an individual diagnosis of the underlying voice disorder failed due to a vast spread of the parameter values within the respective groups. Classification accuracies of 75-90% were achieved. The high misclassification rate of up to 25% implied that in voice disorder diagnosis, the individual interpretation of the parameter values has to be done carefully.