Posted By Andy Thompson Is there any literature available on the incidence of infections acquired from electronic laboratory instrumentation returned to a supplier? I have found literature on the incidence amongst lab workers, but not among others. I am having to come up with a realistic process to deal with instruments that may, potentially, be contaminated in some way with Cat 3 or 4 pathogens. The customer does not supply a reliable decontamination certificate. The perceptions are that equipment being returned contaminated is unlikely to be biologically contaminated, but it might, given the use it is used for. The likelyhood is low, but the worst case is very severe, given the highly infectious nature of some of the pathogens involved. The equipment is designed for the analysis of pathogenic material. There is an assumption that the customer would flush fluidics etc with chloros etc, but this is a false assumption, since the instrument may be in a fail mode, and cannot be flushed. The obvious answer is to disinfect equipment in some way before it gets to the production area (repairs, service, upgrades, disposal etc). There is a complication in that it is probable some of the equipment may need a degree of dismantlement prior to a fumigation. This will need to be done under containment. Suddenly the costs go shooting up; to equip an entire facility to handle TV-sized pieces of equipment would cost in the order of £300-400k. It would be useful to know what other instrument manufacturers do. I know some will only service on site, using the customer's containment. In this case, it is simply not possible for a variety of reasons. Writing off large numbers of equipment isn't feasible either. One suggestion is that vaccinating workers, as done in the water industry, would be sufficient. I don't think that will be, but I would be keen to hear other's thoughts on this.

Posted By Son of SkyWalker Having formerly worked in a bioscience laboratory at Class 1, 2 and 3 I can say that any company knowingly sending equipment out of a class 3 or 4 lab without thoroughly decontaminating it would be breaking the law. This would lead to an uncontrolled situation. You should ensure they supply you with a method statement and a certificate/letter to show it has been done. It is possible to formaldehyde fumigate (or use other chemicals) many types of equipment. Son of Skywalker

Posted By Ian Blenkharn I have worked in the clinical and laboratroy environment and come across several issues where in situ decontamination of equipment cannot be undertaken due to the sensitive nature of the equipment, and the underlying fault condition. The limitations of 'in house customer service' of high value complex equipment that precludes extensive dismantliung and may otherwise invalidate a warrenty or sevice contract. Some flexibility is required, that really should be introduced at the design stage to permit sacrifice of modular components as an alternative to sacrifice of the whole. Where the risk if great with a Cat III or Cat IV pathogen, the usual solution if to seal the equipment and gas it on site using formaldehyde. A service engineer can then dismantle key components and expose those components that may not have been treated adequately. The equipment is then re-treated. Close liaison with the costomers, who should be experienced in dealing with the pathogen in question, to guide and support the engineer. Having a certificate signed off to confirm decontamination of any equipment returned for service is a good start, but it would be foolhardy to rely on this. Precautions are still necessary. The decontamination process may have been inadequate or incomplete, and those components exposed for repair or replacement may still be contaminated.