Estudo de desenvolvimento metodológico de elaboração e validação de medidas de avaliação em saúde, com a finalidade de contribuir com sistemas de avaliação de práticas de controle e prevenção de infecção hospitalar, pela elaboração e validação de oito indicadores para avaliação do processamento de artigos odonto-médico-hospitalares. A partir de fundamentação teórico-científica e contemplando avaliações de estrutura, processo e resultado, tais indicadores permitem elaboração de índices de conformidade com relação às melhores práticas esperadas (padrão-ouro). A validação referiu-se à validade de conteúdo, pela técnica de consenso de especialistas para julgamento de representatividade e aplicabilidade. Todos os indicadores foram aprovados. Os julgamentos efetuados, incluindo comentários e sugestões, demonstraram a importância de se realizar validação de processos de avaliação, independentemente da existência de critérios padrão-ouro e/ou relevância na prática assistencial.

Background Considering the new SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the potential scarcity of material resources, the reuse of personal protective equipment such as filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) for N95 filtering or higher is being discussed, mainly regarding the effectiveness and safety of cleaning, disinfection and sterilization processes. Aim To analyze the available evidence in the literature on the safety in processing FFRs. Methods A systematic review conducted by searching for studies in the following databases: PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS, CENTRAL, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus. Results Forty studies were included in this review. The disinfectant/sterilizing agents most frequently tested at different concentrations and exposure periods were ultraviolet irradiation, vaporized hydrogen peroxide and steam sterilization. Microbial reduction was assessed in 21 (52.5%) studies. The only disinfectants/sterilizers that did not caused degradation of the material-integrity were alcohol, electric cooker, ethylene oxide, and peracetic acid fogging. Exposure to ultraviolet irradiation or microwave generated-steam resulted in a nonsignificant reduction in filter performance. Conclusion There is a complex relationship between the FFR raw materials and the cycle conditions of the decontamination methods, evidencing the need for validating FFRs by models and manufacturers, as well as the process. Some methods may require additional tests to demonstrate the safety of FFRs for use due to toxicity.

Objective: Guidelines recommend that the cleaning area in a Central Sterile Supply Department (CSSD) maintain a negative pressure of the environmental air, but how much this system can impact the contamination of the air by bioaerosols in the area is not known. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of negative pressure on CSSD by evaluating the microbiological air quality of this sector. Methods: Microbiological air samples were collected in two CSSD in the same hospital: one with and one without a negative air pressure system. Outdoor air samples were collected as a comparative control. Andersen six-stage air sampler was used to obtain the microbiological air samples. Results: The concentration of bioaerosols in the CSSD without negative pressure was 273.15 and 206.71 CFU/m 3 , while in the CSSD with negative pressure the concentration of bioaerosols was 116.96 CFU/m 3 and 131.10 CFU/m 3 . The number of isolated colonies in the negative pressure CSSD was significantly lower (P = .01541). Conclusion:The findings showed that the negative pressure system in the CSSD cleaning area contributed to the quantitative reduction in bioaerosols. However, the concentration of bioaerosols was lower than that established in the guideline for indoor air quality of many countries. Therefore, it cannot be concluded that CSSDs which do not have a negative pressure system in their cleaning area offer occupational risk.

No abstract