Risks of Using Steam for Immediate Use
Explaining why Steam Sterilization is not the best method for immediate-use reprocessing of medical instruments
The absence of a clear alternative to Immediate-Use Steam Sterilization (IUSS) has contributed to the long debate among infection control and sterile processing professionals over its use. Using IUSS as a method for rapid turnaround of a critical surgical instrument involves shortcuts to FDA-prescribed sterility assurance procedures that shift much of the regulatory and civil legal responsibility from the steam sterilizer and surgical instrument manufacturer to the healthcare facility. This article discusses the risks and liabilities of using IUSS and how an alternative is currently available to eliminate those risks and liabilities.
The healthcare facility is confronted with the stark reality that in-house protocols for IUSS can compromise the performance standards prescribed by the FDA and other regulatory bodies. This raises a crucial question: Can the healthcare facility realistically conform to established sterility performance standards within their IUSS protocols when they reduce or eliminate a steam sterilizer’s dry cycle and compromise instrument packaging? The importance of maintaining these established standards cannot be overstated, as any compromise could lead to potential safety and liability issues.
