Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:

login

Log in through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Clinical Effectiveness of Low-Temperature Sterilization Technologies

William A. Rutala and David J. Weber
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology
Vol. 19, No. 10 (Oct., 1998), pp. 798-804
DOI: 10.2307/30141431
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30141431
Page Count: 7
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Clinical Effectiveness of Low-Temperature Sterilization Technologies
Preview not available

Abstract

The elimination of chlorofluorocarbons by the Clean Air Act has led to the development of alternative technologies for low-temperature sterilization in the healthcare setting, including 100% ethylene oxide, ethylene oxide with other stabilizing gases, immersion in peracetic acid, and gas plasmas. The ideal sterilant does not exist, and infection control professionals should understand the advantages and disadvantages of these processes. However, when combined with adherence to standard cleaning protocols, the available data suggest that the currently available Food and Drug Administration-cleared low-temperature sterilization technologies can inactivate a clinically relevant inoculum of highly resistant organisms.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
798
    798
  • Thumbnail: Page 
799
    799
  • Thumbnail: Page 
800
    800
  • Thumbnail: Page 
801
    801
  • Thumbnail: Page 
802
    802
  • Thumbnail: Page 
803
    803
  • Thumbnail: Page 
804
    804