Reprocessing and reuse of urological armamentarium: How correct are we!

• Main Authors: Krutik Vipulbhai Raval, Rajeev Chaudhari, Shahil Rameshbhai Khant, Omkar Joglekar, Dipen Patel
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2017-01-01
• Series: Urology Annals
• Subjects: Reprocessing; sterilization; urological devices
• Online Access: http://www.urologyannals.com/article.asp?issn=0974-7796;year=2017;volume=9;issue=2;spage=117;epage=124;aulast=Raval
• ISSN: 0974-7796; 0974-7834

Healthcare is expensive for a large proportion of the population in spite of high per capita income and good health insurance penetration. In an effort to reduce cost of the procedure, reprocessing of devices was started in the late 1970s. Reprocessing practice includes various measures such as proper cleaning, disinfection, and sterilization procedures. As reprocessing is aimed at reducing cost, there is a potential risk of compromising patient safety due to cross contamination after inadequate sterilization. There is also risk of performance alteration of urological reprocessed devices during sterilization/disinfection processing. Therefore, there is a need for formulating proper guidelines to decide methods of reprocessing for various urological equipment. There is also need to discuss the problematic areas that urologists face and to find their solutions. A PubMed search was made in September 2016, using key words “reprocessing of medical devices,” “Single Use Devices,” “methods of reprocessing of devices in clinical practice,” “use of formalin chamber,” “urological disposable sterilization,” etc., After excluding duplicates, all English articles were reviewed by title and abstract. Full texts of selected articles were obtained, and these articles were cross-referenced to find any other related articles. All the articles were reviewed. A product can be reused if it can be economically reprocessed with validated protocols with preservation of its function. There is no reason to discard it after one use. This practice is useful for controlling economics of a urological case and to reduce the financial burden. Current Food and Drug Administration guidelines are stringent. The contamination described to test the sterilization process in the suggested guidelines actually does never exist in clinical practice. Therefore, new guidelines considering the clinical practice scenario are desirable.