Stethoscopes no longer need to touch patients

Background It is clear that, while stethoscopes are commonly used in cancer patients, they are frequently contaminated with pathogens. Even 60 seconds of alcohol swab cleaning doesn't reliably provide sterile contact. Thus ultimately, stethoscopes are potential vectors that transmit pathogens when touching patients. A proposed draft of the new 2024 CDC guidelines mandates that if shared patient-care items are used (e.g., stethoscopes), they must be cleaned and disinfected between patients. This requires that the stethoscope must be cleaned and disinfected between every single patient contact, or a disposable option used. Unfortunately, studies demonstrate that disposable stethoscopes are inferior auscultation tools, vs. the personal stethoscope. Therefore, to be in compliance with 2024 CDC guidelines improvements in personal stethoscope hygiene are required. The DiskCover is a touch free applied single use disposable stethoscope barrier consistent with CDC guidelines. We performed an in vitro investigation the efficacy of the DiskCover (Asepticscope, Inc, San Diego, CA) in providing an aseptic patient auscultation. Methods This was a prospective, randomized evaluation of the ability of the DiskCover to prevent patient exposure to pathogens found on the stethoscope. Stethoscope diaphragms were inoculated with Candida Albicans (C. Albicans), Clostridioides Difficile (C. Diff), Extended- Spectrum B-Lactamase Producing Escherichia Coli (ESBL), Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA), Pseudomonas Aeruginosa (P. Aeruginosa), and Vancomycin- Resistant Enterococcus Faecium (VRE), then randomized to either DiskCover placement or control (no DiskCover). Stethoscope's then underwent aerobic or anerobic incubation.Diaphragm cultures were obtained at 0.25, 0.5, 2, 4, and 24 hours of incubation, and placed on Blood, Chocolate, and MacConkey agar. Colony formation was subsequently manually counted. Results Stethoscope diaphragms with a DiskCover were sterile in 100% of cases, while those without Discover's had extensive pathogen contamination. Compared to all controls, for all species of pathogens, all DiskCover contacts were sterile (p<0.05 for all comparisons). Conclusions DiskCovers provided a sterile point of contact in all instances vs. control, which had large numbers of pathogenetic colonies.