Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2018; 12(03): 417-421
DOI: 10.4103/ejd.ejd_351_17
Original Article
Dental Investigation Society

Effects of resterilization and storage time on sterility of paper/plastic pouches

Yada Puangsa-Ard
1   Department of Advanced General Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
,
Sroisiri Thaweboon
2   Department of Oral Microbiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
,
Nattinee Jantaratnotai
3   Department of Pharmacology, Faculty of Science, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
,
Praewpat Pachimsawat
1   Department of Advanced General Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
16 September 2019 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Objectives: Paper/plastic pouches are widely used packaging materials for autoclaving medical and dental equipment. Although these pouches are recommended for single use, they are generally reused in Thailand. This study aimed to determine the ability of paper/plastic pouches to maintain sterility after multiple sterilization processes and stored in a closed environment for up to 6 months. Materials and Methods: A total of 6720 paper/plastic pouches were divided into four experimental groups: new pouches, 1 time, 3 times, and 5 times resterilized pouches. A piece of filter paper was placed inside each pouch, and the pouch was sealed, sterilized, and stored for up to 6 months. At the end of each storage period, the pouch was opened, and the filter paper was transferred to culture broth for microbial cultivation to determine sterility. Negative and positive controls were also used to validate the procedures. Results: All filter papers in the experimental groups, as well as the negative control group, remained sterile for up to 6 months of storage in a closed environment. On the contrary, all filter papers in the positive control group showed microbial contamination. Conclusions: In a closed storage condition, the paper/plastic pouches that passed multiple sterilization processes (up to 5 times resterilization) still maintained good barrier efficacy and remained sterile for up to 6 months.

Key words:

Microbial contamination - paper/plastic pouches - resterilization - sterility - storage time
 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Spry C. Understanding current steam sterilization recommendations and guidelines. AORN J 2008; 88: 537-50
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Kohn WG, Collins AS, Cleveland JL, Harte JA, Eklund KJ, Malvitz DM. et al. Guidelines for infection control in dental health-care settings-2003. MMWR Recomm Rep 2003; 52: 1-61
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Association of periOperative Registered Nurses. Recommended practices for selection and use of packaging systems for sterilization. AORN J 2007; 85: 801-2 804-7 809-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Mayworm D. Paper/plastic pouch heat seals. J Hosp Supply Process Distrib 1983; 1: 32-4
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Standard PG, Mackel DC, Mallison GF. Microbial penetration of muslin- and paper-wrapped sterile packs stored on open shelves and in closed cabinets. Appl Microbiol 1971; 22: 432-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Klapes NA, Greene VW, Langholz AC, Hunstiger C. Effect of long-term storage on sterile status of devices in surgical packs. Infect Control 1987; 8: 289-93
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Thanakitprapa P, Jaratrasamee A, Pachimsawat P. Autoclave monitoring and packaging in Bangkok dental offices, Thailand. M Dent J 2017; 37: 173-82
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation. ANSI/AAMI ST79: 2010 & A1: 2010-Comprehensive Guide to Steam Sterilization and Sterility Assurance in Health Care Facilities. Arlington, VA: Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation; 2010
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Ostrom QT, Gittleman H, Stetson L, Virk SM, Barnholtz-Sloan JS. Epidemiology of gliomas. Cancer Treat Res 2015; 163: 1-4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Maniglia-Ferreira C, de Almeida Gomes F, Ximenes T, Neto MA, Arruda TE, Ribamar GG. et al Influence of reuse and cervical preflaring on the fracture strength of reciprocating instruments. Eur J Dent 2017; 11: 41-7
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Hogg NJ, Morrison AD. Resterilization of instruments used in a hospital-based oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic. J Can Dent Assoc 2005; 71: 179-82
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Palananthana M, Pachimsawat P, Thaweboon S. Microbial finding of reused laminated film pouches stored in closed cabinet for 4 months. M Dent J 2006; 26: 179-86
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Butt WE, Bradley Jr DV, Mayhew RB, Schwartz RS. Evaluation of the shelf life of sterile instrument packs. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1991; 72: 650-4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Schwartz R, Davis R. Safe storage times for sterile dental packs. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1990; 70: 297-300
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Sattayasanskul W, Saetoh S, Thiengmontree A, Veerakeiatsoonthorn S. Effect of storage time on sterility of instrument in oral surgical packs. J Dent Assoc Thai 1990; 40: 54-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Webster J, Lloyd W, Ho P, Burridge C, George N. Rethinking sterilization practices: Evidence for event-related outdating. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2003; 24: 622-4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Power DA, Zimbro MJ. Difco & BBL Manual: Manual of Microbiological Culture Media. Sparks, MD: BD Diagnostic Systems; 2003
    Google Scholar