1. Automated washing with the Reliance Endoscope Processing System and its equivalence to optimal manual cleaning 
Michelle J. Alfa, PhD, FCCM, Nancy Olson, BSc, RT, Pat DeGagne, RT 
American Journal of Infection Control 
Volume 34, Issue 9, Pages (November 2006)
DOI: /j.ajic
Copyright © 2006 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Terms and Conditions

2. Fig 1
Effect of bronchoscope washing/cleaning on Enterococcus faecalis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The S/B channel (white bars) of a Pentax bronchoscope was inoculated with ATS containing E faecalis and P aeruginosa from the umbilical end to the distal end. A 1-cm2 area on the S (solid bars) of the bending rubber at the distal end was also inoculated. The scope was dried for 1 hour at room temperature and then either harvested (positive control) or processed using manual cleaning or the automated Reliance EPS washing phase. Negative controls consisted of samples taken from the washed or cleaned/disinfected bronchoscope that was not soiled but was processed through the cleaning protocol. The effect of washing/cleaning on viable E faecalis (A) and P aeruginosa (B) was determined. All values represent the average of 4 replicates. The limit of detection for the spread-plate viable count method was 10 cfu/mL. The organisms detected in the “Manual Negative” cleaning represent organisms derived from the tap water used for manual cleaning.
American Journal of Infection Control  , DOI: ( /j.ajic )
Copyright © 2006 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Terms and Conditions

3. Fig 2
Effect of duodenoscope washing/cleaning on Enterococcus faecalis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The S/B (white bar), A/W (diagonal-hatch bar), and EGW (cross-hatch bar) of an Olympus duodenoscope were inoculated with ATS containing E faecalis and P aeruginosa from the umbilical end to the distal end. A 1-cm2 area on the S (solid bar) of the insertion tube at the distal end was also inoculated. The scope was dried for 1 hour at room temperature and then either harvested (positive control) or processed using manual cleaning or the automated Reliance EPS washing phase. Negative controls consisted of samples taken from the washed or cleaned/disinfected duodenoscope that was not soiled but was processed through the cleaning protocol. The effect of washing/cleaning on viable E faecalis (A) and P aeruginosa (B) was determined. All values represent the average of 4 replicates. The limit of detection for the spread-plate viable count method was 10 cfu/mL. The organisms detected in the “Manual Negative” cleaning represent organisms derived from the tap water used for manual cleaning.
American Journal of Infection Control  , DOI: ( /j.ajic )
Copyright © 2006 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Terms and Conditions

4. Fig 3
Effect of colonoscope washing/cleaning on Enterococcus faecalis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The S/B (white bar), A/W (diagonal-hatch bar), and WJ (cross-hatch bar) of a Fujinon colonoscope were inoculated with ATS containing E faecalis and P aeruginosa from the umbilical end to the distal end. A 1-cm2 area on the S (solid bar) of the angulation knob at the control head was also inoculated. The scope was dried for 1 hour at room temperature and then either harvested (positive control) or processed using manual cleaning or the automated Reliance EPS washing phase. Negative controls consisted of samples taken from the washed or cleaned/disinfected colonoscope that was not soiled but was processed through the protocol. The effect of washing/cleaning on viable E faecalis (A) and P aeruginosa (B) was determined. All values represent the average of 4 replicates. The limit of detection for the spread-plate viable count method was 10 cfu/mL.
American Journal of Infection Control  , DOI: ( /j.ajic )
Copyright © 2006 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Terms and Conditions