Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-495rp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-20T18:31:10.058Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of a Rapid Readout Biological Indicator for Steam Sterilization With Four Conventional Biological Indicators and Five Chemical Indicators

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Nathan L. Belkin
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Letters to the Editor
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 17 , Issue 12 , December 1996 , pp. 773
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1996

References

1. Rutala, WA, Jones, SM, Weber, DJ. Comparison of a rapid readout biological indicator for steam sterilization with four conventional biological indicators and five chemical indicators. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1996;17:423–428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Vesley, D, Nellis, MA, Allwood, PB. Evaluation of a rapid readout biological indicator for 121°C gravity and 132°C vacuum-assisted steam sterilization cycles. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1995;16:281–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation. Good Hospital Practice: Steam Sterilization and Sterility Assurance. Arlington, VA: ANSI/AAMI:ST46-1993.Google Scholar
4. Belkin, NL. The new 16-towel test pack: is it a challenge to the sterilizer? Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1995;16:495–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Vesley, D, Nellis, MA, Allwood, PB. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1995;16:496. Letter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. ‘Buyer beware’ on sterilizer purchases. Hospital Purchasing News; March 15, 1996;20(3):36.Google Scholar