4.5 Review

Uniform: an evidence review of the microbiological significance of uniforms and uniform policy in the prevention and control of healthcare-associated infections. Report to the Department of Health (England)

期刊

JOURNAL OF HOSPITAL INFECTION
卷 66, 期 4, 页码 301-307

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2007.03.026

关键词

nurses uniform's; healthcare clothing; healthcare-associated infections; decontamination; hospital laundry; domestic laundry of uniforms

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A systematic search and quality assessment of published literature was conducted to establish current knowledge on the role of healthcare workers uniforms' as vehicles for the transfer of healthcare-associated infections. This review comprised a systematic search of national and international. guidance, published literature and data on recent advances in laundry technology and processes. We found only a small number of relevant studies that provided limited evidence directly related to the decontamination of uniforms. Studies concerning domestic laundry processes are small scale and largely observational. Current practice and guidance for laundering uniforms is extrapolated from studies of industrial hospital linen processing. Healthcare workers' uniforms, including white coats, become progressivety contaminated in use with bacteria of tow pathogenicity from the wearer and of mixed pathogenicity from the clinical environment and patients. The hypothesis that uniforms/clothing could be a vehicle for the transmission of infections is not supported by existing evidence. All components of the laundering process contribute to the removal or killing of micro-organisms on fabric. There is no robust evidence of a difference in efficacy of decontamination of uniforms/clothing between industrial and domestic laundry processes, or that the home laundering of uniforms provides inadequate decontamination. (c) 2007 The Hospital Infection Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据