VOMIT BAG

A VOMIT  BAG is designed by M/s Taimed Hygiene Pvt. Ltd.,

Vomiting Absorbent Bag is the Solution to control Influenza bacteria due to Spreading Saliva & Vomiting in hospitals.The Spitting Glass & Vomiting Absorbent Bag is a unique product that provides a fast and easy way to prevent such types of diseases.Deadly infections spread through such medium spitting is rampant in hospitals. When we do so, we don’t realize that we are spreading a number diseases and infections among people.

Today inspite of medical advancement tuberculosis is on the rise. A deadly infection like swine flu probably became uncontrollable in our country because of the pernicious practice.People aren’t aware that saliva contains bacteria. Through evaporation, they permeate into the air and then enter into the respiratory system of a healthy person.Moreover people also have some myths that if fluids are generated when they cough, they must spit them out.

Product specification

Major constituents:

  1. Paper cup with lid
  2. Circle shape disc (containing Absorbent, binding agent & disinfectant)
  3. Tissue paper (to Cover the disc)

 Better Hygiene:

  • Limits the risk of crossed contamination
  • Eliminates the smells.

Sustainable Development:

  • Limits the water consumption
  • Reduces the Cost of cleaning and disinfection products.

Cost Killing:

  • Less time spent for cleaning.
  • The quantities to be used are reduced to the minimum for an optimal profit

Product View:

sp01

TAIMED SPITTING GLASS

sp004

VOMIT BAG

Drawbacks in conventional products:

All the hospitals use Simple Bedpan for spitting Cough/Vomit and does not ensure spilling as they hold the vomit/spitting in the same form. Handling the Bedpan after vomit is a mess for Hospital ward boy/ attendant or person himself. In addition, foul smell will be real problem for the co-patients. Pathogen infection may take place due to the lack of controlling agents.

TAIMED product uniqueness:

  • 100% spill proof due to gel technology.
  • Completely odor free.
  • Pathogens are locked in the gel.

Is it safe?

There are three major modes of infection and human contamination. These are dermal, oral, olfactory (nasal) and eye contact also. Apart from these, some animal can get exposed and affected due to direct handing of byproduct of this cup. All routes are having almost very rare chance to get exposed. The details are given below:

  1. Dermal exposure:

None of the chemicals including polymeric absorbent, binding agent are much lethal. All the quite normal and being used generally in many ordinary applications. The circle shaped disc, consisting of these chemicals is placed in the bottom area of spitting glass and apart from easy reach. There is no chance to touch it with bare hands or another human organ.

  1. Oral exposure:

The disc distance is quire far from human oral route. So, there is no chance to touch it with mouth or tongue. Hence it is safe from this point of view. Generally, nobody is going to intake it by mistake too due to its unique design.

  1. Olfactory (nasal):

Although the cup design is open from upper side and having chance to get contaminated via olfactory route. But special poly sachet stop the oxidation of disc and control the odour of all constituents. Hence it is again safe for nasal infection chances too.

  1. Eye contact:

After or before using this spitting cup, there is no chance to get contaminated via eye route. There is no chance of human eye exposure of any of the product constituents. Hence it is safe again.

  1. Other animal exposure:

It is recommended to handle is like a bio-medical waste after usage. Its disposal must be taken care as per standard guidelines. Littering is never suggested, hence there is no chance to getting infected by any animal, pets, etc. Flies will be away due to phenolic content.

How it works:

It consists of a set of polymeric chains that are parallel to each other and regularly linked to each other by cross-linking agents, thus forming a network. When liquid comes into contact with one of these chains, it is drawn into the molecule by osmosis. Liquid rapidly migrates into the interior of the polymer network where it is stored.

Patient should use it like ordinary spitting cups, but there is no need to add disinfectant into it. It has inbuilt disinfectant and very capable absorbent of liquid i.e. almost 300 ml of liquid residue. There is no chance to run off the sputum if the cup gets dis-balanced or fall. The spitting glass may be used unlimited time within the 24 hours. Then the used Spitting Glass must be disposed off into appropriate bio-medical waste bin.

Comparison between Conventional Bedpan Vs TAIMED product range

S.N. Conventional Product TAIMED Product
1 Uncomfortable opening Comfortable opening of spitting glass as per patients requirements
2 Chance of leakage Leak proof due to use of efficient absorbent
3 Foul smell No smell
4 Risk of pathogen infections Pathogen control provision
5 Additional treatment required after use No additional treatment required after use. Handle and direct disposal as per standard bio-medical waste rules

 

Precautions:

Disposed off the glass within 24 hour after using.

Don’t throw it anywhere.

Proper disposal must be taken as per BMW guidelines.

Effectiveness of Spitting Glass for patients: An Indian preview

Summary

Because maximum effectiveness from disinfection and sterilization results from first cleaning and removing organic and inorganic materials, this document also reviews cleaning methods. The chemical disinfectants discussed for patient-care equipment include alcohols, glutaraldehyde, formaldehyde, hydrogen peroxide, iodophors, ortho-phthalaldehyde, peracetic acid, phenolics, quaternary ammonium compounds, and chlorine. The choice of disinfectant, concentration, and exposure time is based on the risk for infection associated with use of the equipment and other factors discussed in this guideline. The sterilization methods discussed include steam sterilization, ethylene oxide (ETO), hydrogen peroxide gas plasma, and liquid peracetic acid. When properly used, these cleaning, disinfection, and sterilization processes can reduce the risk for infection associated with use of invasive and noninvasive medical and surgical devices. However, for these processes to be effective, health-care workers should adhere strictly to the cleaning, disinfection, and sterilization recommendations in this document and to instructions on product labels.

Keywords: Patients, Disinfectants, Spitting Cup, effectiveness

Introduction:

Tuberculosis (TB) is transmitted mainly by droplet infection and droplet nuclei generated by sputum-positive patients with pulmonary TB. Coughing generates the largest number of droplets of all sizes. Thus, its transmission is attributed to indiscriminate disposal of sputum by patients. Patients and their immediate contacts should thus be cautious of where and how they collect and dispose potentially infectious sputum.

Mycobacterium tuberculosis can survive for months on dry inanimate surfaces. M. bovis can survive on dry surfaces at 4°C. M. tuberculosis can survive in cockroach feces for eight weeks, sputum on carpet (19 days) and wood (over 88 days), moist and dry soil (four weeks), and in the environment for more than 74 days if protected from light (possibly longer if in feces).

Approximately 46.5 million surgical procedures and even more invasive medical procedures—including approximately 5 million gastrointestinal endoscopies—are performed each year. Each procedure involves contact by a medical device or surgical instrument with a patient’s sterile tissue or mucous membranes. A major risk of all such procedures is the introduction of pathogens that can lead to infection. Failure to properly disinfect or sterilize equipment carries not only risk associated with breach of host barriers but also risk for person-to-person transmission (e.g., hepatitis B virus) and transmission of environmental pathogens (e.g., Pseudomonas aeruginosa).

Disinfection and sterilization are essential for ensuring that medical and surgical instruments do not transmit infectious pathogens to patients. Because sterilization of all patient-care items is not necessary, health-care policies must identify, primarily on the basis of the items’ intended use, whether cleaning, disinfection, or sterilization is indicated.

Multiple studies in many countries have documented lack of compliance with established. 3-6 Failure to comply with scientifically-based guidelines has guidelines for disinfection and sterilization. 6-12 This guideline presents a pragmatic approach to the judicious selection led to numerous outbreaks.

This guideline presents a pragmatic approach to the judicious selection and proper use of disinfection and sterilization processes; the approach is based on well-designed studies assessing the efficacy (through laboratory investigations) and effectiveness (through clinical studies) of disinfection and sterilization procedures.

Terminology:

Sterilization describes a process that destroys or eliminates all forms of microbial life and is carried out in health-care facilities by physical or chemical methods. Steam under pressure, dry heat, EtO gas, hydrogen peroxide gas plasma, and liquid chemicals are the principal sterilizing agents used in health-care facilities. Sterilization is intended to convey an absolute meaning; unfortunately, however, some health professionals and the technical and commercial literature refer to “disinfection” as “sterilization” and items as “partially sterile.” When chemicals are used to destroy all forms of microbiologic life, they can be called chemical sterilants. These same germicides used for shorter exposure periods also can be part of the disinfection process (i.e., high-level disinfection).

Disinfection describes a process that eliminates many or all pathogenic microorganisms, except bacterial spores, on inanimate objects (Tables 1 and 2). In health-care settings, objects usually are disinfected by liquid chemicals or wet pasteurization. Each of the various factors that affect the efficacy of disinfection can nullify or limit the efficacy of the process.

Factors that affect the efficacy of both disinfection and sterilization include prior cleaning of the object; organic and inorganic load present; type and level of microbial contamination; concentration of and exposure time to the germicide; physical nature of the object (e.g., crevices, hinges, and lumens); presence of biofilms; temperature and pH of the disinfection process; and in some cases, relative humidity of the sterilization process (e.g., ethylene oxide).

Unlike sterilization, disinfection is not sporicidal. A few disinfectants will kill spores with prolonged exposure times (3–12 hours); these are called chemical sterilants. At similar concentrations but with shorter exposure periods (e.g., 20 minutes for 2% glutaraldehyde), these same disinfectants will kill all microorganisms except large numbers of bacterial spores; they are called high-level disinfectants. Low-level disinfectants can kill most vegetative bacteria, some fungi, and some viruses in a practical period of time (<10 minutes). Intermediate-level disinfectants might be cidal for mycobacteria, vegetative bacteria, most viruses, and most fungi but do not necessarily kill bacterial spores. Germicides differ markedly, primarily in their antimicrobial spectrum and rapidity of action.

Cleaning is the removal of visible soil (e.g., organic and inorganic material) from objects and surfaces and normally is accomplished manually or mechanically using water with detergents or enzymatic products. Thorough cleaning is essential before high-level disinfection and sterilization because inorganic and organic materials that remain on the surfaces of instruments interfere with the effectiveness of these processes. Decontamination removes pathogenic microorganisms from objects so they are safe to handle, use, or discard.

Terms with the suffix cide or cidal for killing action also are commonly used. For example, a germicide is an agent that can kill microorganisms, particularly pathogenic organisms (“germs”). The term germicide includes both antiseptics and disinfectants. Antiseptics are germicides applied to living tissue and skin; disinfectants are antimicrobials applied only to inanimate objects. In general, antiseptics are used only on the skin and not for surface disinfection, and disinfectants are not used for skin antisepsis because they can injure skin and other tissues. Virucide, fungicide, bactericide, sporicide, and tuberculocide can kill the type of microorganism identified by the prefix. For example, a bactericide is an agent that kills bacteria.

Disinfection:

  • Chemical Disinfectants
  • Alcohol
  • Chlorine and Chlorine Compounds
  • Formaldehyde
  • Glutaraldehyde
  • Hydrogen Peroxide
  • Iodophors
  • Ortho-phthalaldehyde
  • Peracetic Acid
  • Peracetic Acid and Hydrogen Peroxide
  • Phenolics
  • Quaternary Ammonium Compounds
  • Miscellaneous Inactivating Agents
  • Other Germicides:
  • Ultraviolet Radiation
  • Pasteurization
  • Flushing- and Washer-Disinfectors

Phenolic:

Phenol has occupied a prominent place in the field of hospital disinfection since its initial use as a germicide by Lister in his pioneering work on antiseptic surgery. In the past 30 years, however, work has concentrated on the numerous phenol derivatives or phenolics and their antimicrobial properties. Phenol derivatives originate when a functional group (e.g., alkyl, phenyl, benzyl, halogen) replaces one of the hydrogen atoms on the aromatic ring. Two phenol derivatives commonly found as constituents of hospital disinfectants are ortho-phenylphenol and ortho-benzyl-para-chlorophenol. The antimicrobial properties of these compounds and many other phenol derivatives are much improved over those of the parent chemical. Phenolics are absorbed by porous materials, and the residual disinfectant can irritate tissue. In 1970, depigmentation of the skin was reported to be caused by phenolic germicidal 731 detergents containing para-tertiary butylphenol and para-tertiary amylphenol.

Mode of Action:

In high concentrations, phenol acts as a gross protoplasmic poison, penetrating and disrupting the cell wall and precipitating the cell proteins. Low concentrations of phenol and higher molecular-weight phenol derivatives cause bacterial death by inactivation of essential enzyme systems and leakage of essential metabolites from the cell wall 732.

Microbicidal Activity:

Published reports on the antimicrobial efficacy of commonly used phenolics showed they were bactericidal, fungicidal, virucidal, and tuberculocidal 14, 61, 71, 73, 227, 416, 573, 732-738. One study demonstrated little or no virucidal effect of a phenolic against coxsackie B4, echovirus 11, and poliovirus 1 736. Similarly, 12% ortho-phenylphenol failed to inactivate any of the three hydrophilic viruses after a 10-minute exposure time, although 5% phenol was lethal for these viruses 72. A 0.5% dilution of a phenolic (2.8% ortho-phenylphenol and 2.7% ortho-benzyl-para-chlorophenol) inactivated HIV 227 and a 2% solution of a phenolic (15% ortho-phenylphenol and 6.3% para-tertiary-amylphenol) inactivated all but one of 11 fungi tested 71.

Manufacturers’ data using the standardized AOAC methods demonstrate that commercial phenolics are not sporicidal but are tuberculocidal, fungicidal, virucidal, and bactericidal at their recommended use-dilution. Attempts to substantiate the bactericidal label claims of phenolics using the AOAC Use-Dilution Method occasionally have failed 416, 737. However, results from these same studies have varied dramatically among laboratories testing identical products.

Uses:

Many phenolic germicides are EPA-registered as disinfectants for use on environmental surfaces (e.g., bedside tables, bedrails, and laboratory surfaces) and noncritical medical devices. Phenolics are not FDA-cleared as high-level disinfectants for use with semicritical items but could be used to preclean or decontaminate critical and semicritical devices before terminal sterilization or high-level disinfection.

The use of phenolics in nurseries has been questioned because of hyperbilirubinemia in infants placed in bassinets where phenolic detergents were used 739. In addition, bilirubin levels were reported to increase in phenolic-exposed infants, compared with nonphenolic-exposed infants, when the phenolic was prepared according to the manufacturers’ recommended dilution 740. If phenolics are used to clean nursery floors, they must be diluted as recommended on the product label. Phenolics (and other disinfectants) should not be used to clean infant bassinets and incubators while occupied. If phenolics are used to terminally clean infant bassinets and incubators, the surfaces should be rinsed thoroughly with water and dried before reuse of infant bassinets and incubators 17.

Other Germicides

Several compounds have antimicrobial activity but for various reasons have not been incorporated into the armamentarium of health-care disinfectants. These include mercurials, sodium hydroxide, β-propiolactone, chlorhexidine gluconate, cetrimide-chlorhexidine, glycols (triethylene and propylene), and the Tego disinfectants. Two authoritative references examine these agents in detail 16, 412. A peroxygen-containing formulation had marked bactericidal action when used as a 1% weight/volume solution and virucidal activity at 3% 49, but did not have mycobactericidal activity at concentrations of 2.3% and 4% and exposure times ranging from 30 to 120 minutes 750. It also required 20 hours to kill B. atrophaeus spores 751. A powder-based peroxygen compound for disinfecting contaminated spill was strongly and rapidly bactericidal 752.

In preliminary studies, nanoemulsions (composed of detergents and lipids in water) showed activity against vegetative bacteria, enveloped viruses and Candida. This product represents a potential agent for use as a topical biocidal agent. 753-755.

New disinfectants that require further evaluation include glucoprotamin756, tertiary amines 703. And a light-activated antimicrobial coating 757. Several other disinfection technologies might have potential applications in the healthcare setting 758.

Neutralization of Germicides

One of the difficulties associated with evaluating the bactericidal activity of disinfectants is prevention of bacteriostasis from disinfectant residues carried over into the subculture media. Likewise, small amounts of disinfectants on environmental surfaces can make an accurate bacterial count difficult to get when sampling of the health-care environment as part of an epidemiologic or research investigation. One way these problems may be overcome is by employing neutralizers that inactivate 807-809. Two commonly used neutralizing media for chemical disinfectants are residual disinfectants Letheen Media and D/E Neutralizing Media. The former contains lecithin to neutralize quaternaries and polysorbate 80 (Tween 80) to neutralize phenolics, hexachlorophene, formalin, and, with lecithin, ethanol. The D/E Neutralizing media will neutralize a broad spectrum of antiseptic and disinfectant chemicals, including quaternary ammonium compounds, phenols, iodine and chlorine compounds, mercurials, formaldehyde, and glutaraldehyde 810. A review of neutralizers used in germicide testing has been published808.

Conclusion

When properly used, disinfection and sterilization can ensure the safe use of invasive and non-invasive medical devices. However, current disinfection and sterilization guidelines must be strictly followed.

References:

  • William A. Rutala and David J. Weber (2008): Guideline for Disinfection and Sterilization in Healthcare Facilities. Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC), Department of Health and Human Services, USA, pp: 158.
  • Abhishek Singh, Vipin Goyal, Shewtank Goel (2016): Sputum Collection and Disposal Perceptions and Practices Among Pulmonary Tuberculosis Patients from Northern India, Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 10(12): LC16-LC18
  • Yang S, Lee GW, Chen CM, Wu CC, Yu KP. The size and concentration of droplets generated by coughing in human subjects. J Aerosol Med. 2007;20(4):484-94.
  • Bhatt G, Vyas S, Trivedil K. An epidemiological study of multi drug resistant tuberculosis cases registered under Revised National Tuberculosis Control Programme of Ahmedabad City. Indian J Tuberc. 2012;59(1):18-27.
  • Jangid VK, Agrawal NK, Yadav GS, Pandey S, Mathur BB. Health-seeking behaviour and social stigma for tuberculosis in tuberculosis patients at a tertiary-care center in North West India. Int J Med Sci Public Health.2016;5(9):1893-99.
  • JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, Oct. 1990, p. 2234-2239
  • BEST, M.; SATTAR, S. A.;  SPRINGTHORPE, V. S. AND  KENNEDY, M. E. (1990): Efficacies of Selected Disinfectants against Mycobacterium tuberculosis