Multi-dose vial: difference between revisions
Diff·revision 15 → 16·19:43, 14 Aug 2025
Difference between revision 15 and revision 16 of Multi-dose vial. 2 lines changed; the page grew by 539 bytes.
| Revision 15 — 21:56, 30 Jul 2025 ImportPolicyIggy (talk) expand §Definition and compendial basis 18,197 bytes +146 | Revision 16 — 19:43, 14 Aug 2025 A1c_Alder (talk) de-orphan 18,736 bytes +539 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 106 | '''Transmission via the vial as a vector.''' The larger public-health events have involved a syringe used on one patient being reintroduced into a shared vial, contaminating the vial with blood, which is then drawn into a syringe for the next patient. Preservatives are irrelevant to this mechanism, since blood-borne viruses are unaffected by them. | 106 | '''Transmission via the vial as a vector.''' The larger public-health events have involved a syringe used on one patient being reintroduced into a shared vial, contaminating the vial with blood, which is then drawn into a syringe for the next patient. Preservatives are irrelevant to this mechanism, since blood-borne viruses are unaffected by them. |
| 107 | 107 | ||
| + | 108 | The best documented example is an outbreak of hepatitis C at an endoscopy clinic in Nevada, investigated in 2007 and 2008. Investigators concluded that reuse of syringes on individual patients, combined with the use of single-use propofol vials for multiple patients, transmitted hepatitis C virus; the investigation led to notification of thousands of former patients for testing. The event is cited in infection-control literature as the canonical demonstration that the syringe, not the vial, is the proximate vector.{{r|fischer2010}} | |
| + | 109 | ||
| 108 | == References == | 110 | == References == |
| 109 | {{reflist}} | 111 | {{reflist}} |