论文部分内容阅读
目的比较多功能空气消毒机与紫外线灯在输血科储血室空气消毒的效果。方法将实验分成2组,多功能空气消毒机消毒设为实验组,紫外线灯照射空气消毒设为对照组。2组各消毒50次。在无人状态下,2组每次各消毒1 h;在有人状态下,实验组连续消毒,对照组停止消毒。采用自然沉降法于消毒前0 min、消毒后0 min、60 min、120 min及工作第30 min、60 min、120 min时采样,检测每组空气消毒效果。结果在无人状态下,消毒前后比较,2组均能明显降低空气中菌落数,消毒后室内空气符合环境标准要求。在有人状态下,对照组空气中菌落数迅速升高,至60 min和120 min时,空气中菌落数分别达(9.32±1.74)cfu/(10 min·Φ90皿)和(15.80±2.01)cfu/(10 min·Φ90皿),而实验组达120 min时,空气中菌落数始终<8.0 cfu/(10 min·Φ90皿)。结论在有人状态下,使用多功能空气消毒机进行空气消毒效果明显优于紫外线灯照射消毒。
Objective To compare the effect of multi-functional air disinfection machine and ultraviolet light disinfection in blood chamber of blood transfusion department. Methods The experiment was divided into two groups. The multi-functional air disinfection machine was disinfected as the experimental group, and the ultraviolet light irradiation air disinfection was set as the control group. 2 groups of disinfection 50 times. In the unmanned state, the two groups were disinfected for 1 hour each time; in the state of somebody, the experimental group was disinfected continuously and the control group stopped the disinfection. The natural sedimentation method was used to measure the air disinfection effect of each group before 0 min, 0 min, 60 min, 120 min and 30 min, 60 min, 120 min after disinfection. The results in no state, before and after disinfection, the two groups can significantly reduce the number of colonies in the air after disinfection of indoor air to meet environmental standards. In the control group, the number of colonies in the air rapidly increased in some cases, and the number of colonies in the air reached (9.32 ± 1.74) cfu / (10 min · φ90) and (15.80 ± 2.01) cfu respectively at 60 min and 120 min / (10 min · Φ90 dish), while the experimental group reached 120 min, the number of colonies in the air <8.0 cfu / (10 min · Φ90 dish). Conclusion In some state, the use of multi-functional air disinfection of air disinfection was significantly better than the UV light irradiation disinfection.