Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Quality control of rigid endoscopes: a comparative study between ScopeControl® and surgeons’ evaluation
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Quality control of rigid endoscopes: a comparative study between ScopeControl® and surgeons’ evaluation
Do you wish to request the book?
Quality control of rigid endoscopes: a comparative study between ScopeControl® and surgeons’ evaluation
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Quality control of rigid endoscopes: a comparative study between ScopeControl® and surgeons’ evaluation
2021
Overview
BackgroundIn central sterile services departments (CSSD), the functionality of rigid endoscopes, which are complex and fragile reusable devices, is usually controlled visually and is considered a complex and subjective task. ScopeControl® was developed to provide an automated quality control of rigid endoscopes by measuring the value of six parameters: viewing angle (VA), field of view (FV), color correctness (CC), light transmission (LT), fibers transmission (FT), and focus (FC). The aim of the present study was to assess the ability of ScopeControl® to pre-emptively identify endoscope defects before the surgeon considers them as defective.MethodsThe same endoscope was evaluated by surgeons during surgery using a scoring scale as well as the CSSD staff using the ScopeControl® during reprocessing. The ScopeControl® categorized the endoscope into 3 groups: “passed,” “in danger,” and “failed.” Correlations between the surgeon’s evaluation and results of the ScopeControl® were calculated.ResultsOne hundred sixty-six controls were carried out concerning 51 different endoscopes. According to the surgeon’s evaluation, 78.9% and 80.7% of controls were considered as satisfactory for image and brightness quality, respectively. Results obtained using ScopeControl® found that 13.3% of controls were considered as “passed,” 31.3% “in danger,” and 55.4% “failed,” with poor correlation with the surgeons’ evaluation. LT and FT parameters represented 95.2% of the reasons for failures. The ability of the ScopeControl® to detect endoscope defects earlier than surgeons was validated by tracking the results of endoscopes used and controlled several times.ConclusionThe ScopeControl® achieved an objective and consistent quality control of endoscopes and showed poor correlation with the surgeon’s opinion. In practice, the ScopeControl® could avoid the use of defective endoscopes in the surgery unit and thus improve the quality of the surgical procedure.
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V
Subject
