35

Chapter 3
The data gathered through the instruments are presented in this chapter. The presentation is arranged according to the sequences of the problem stated in the first chapter of this paper. They are the following: significant features on the use of isopropyl and ethyl alcohol in terms of its technique, chemical used, time spent, number of microbial count before and after disinfecting with isopropyl alcohol, number of microbial count before and after disinfecting with ethyl alcohol, significant differences in the microbial count of the two groups in terms of before and after disinfecting with the same agent and between two agents, the number of microbial present in the second and third dilution after disinfecting with the same agent.

Description Overview The present researches aimed to determine the effectiveness of the use of isopropyl against ethyl alcohol in lessening the microbial count of the commonly used medical check-up equipments that is used at the OPD ER of CDH. The number of the microbes that was present in the commonly used medical equipments were counted by the DOST-BSU Food Testing Center and thus given us the data to interpret and analyze. There are three orders conducted to gather the data of the present study. First is to group the commonly used microbial equipments in two groups in which each group is to be disinfected with isopropyl and the other is ethyl alcohol. Second is to obtain the microbial count before the disinfection and third is to obtain the microbial count after the disinfection with the said two alcohols. Study Correlation The present researchers used the study of Jokar and Mohebbi (2011) on comparing the efficacy of alcohol isopropyl and ethanol on the reduction of contamination of medical check-up

36 devices in children ward and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) and compare it with the present research. The related study same as the present study compared the efficacy of ethyl alcohol and isopropyl alcohol by counting the microbial count of the medical equipments before and after sanitizing with each type of alcohol. The results are as follows: Table 1 Number of Microbes Distribution of Equipments According to Group/ Variables Group Experimental Group/ Isopropyl Group Control Group/ Ethyl Group Total 4 8 50 100% No. of Instruments 4 Percentage 50

As shown in Table 1 the commonly used medical equipments used in the study are distributed in two groups, the experimental group and the control group. 4 equipments were used as the experimental group which is the group disinfected by isopropyl alcohol and 4 instruments were used as the control group which is the group disinfected by ethyl alcohol. Figure state that there is an equal distribution of medical instruments per group.

Table 2

37

Chemicals Used In Disinfecting the Medical Equipments

Group Experimental Group Control Group

Alcohol Used Isopropyl Ethyl

Percentage 75% 75%

As shown in Table 2

the two groups used in the study used the same percentage of

chemical. The Experimental group used 75 % isopropyl alcohol and the control group used 75% of ethyl alcohol. These findings indicate that there is no significant difference in chemical used in the study. Table 3 Approximated Used Time In Disinfecting the Medical Equipments Using Ethyl and Isopropyl Alcohol

Group Experimental Group Control Group Total

Alcohol Used Isopropyl Ethyl

Time Spent 15 mins 15 mins 30 mins

As shown in Table 3

there is an approximated 15 minutes of used time to disinfect each

group of medical equipments. The experimental group which was disinfected by isopropyl alcohol used 15 minutes to disinfect the medical equipments on the said group. The control group which

38 was disinfected by ethyl alcohol to disinfect the group of medical equipment used 15 minutes to disinfect the said group. The two groups used a total of 30 minutes in disinfection. These

findings indicate that there is no significant difference in terms of time spent between the two agents used in the study. Table 4 Number of Microbes Before and After Disinfecting the Commonly Used Medical Equipments Using Isopropyl Alcohol Medical Equipments Before Disinfection (colony count) After Disinfection (colony count) Mean Standard Deviation Computed Value

Replicate 1 Stethoscope BP Apparatus Thermometer Tape Measure 19 14 0 3

Replicate 2 11 21 0 11

Replicate 1 0 0 0 0

Replicate 2 0 0 0 0

Replicate 1 19 14 0 3

Replicate 2 11 21 0 11

d= 9.875

Sd=8.18

tc=3.415

As shown in the Table 4 there are significant numbers present before the instrument were disinfected. As seen after the said disinfecting, microbes were removed as well. The Level of significance is 0.05 levels. The t-test for correlated sample is as follows. Reject the null hypotheses if tc > 2.365 or tc < -2.365 with 7 degrees of freedom @ 0.05/2= 0.025. Since tc is greater than 2.365, we reject the null hypothesis, therefore we conclude that there exist a significant mean difference between the before and after microbial counts of the 8 medical instruments.

39 It implies that isopropyl alcohol is effective in disinfecting medical equipment. Table 5 Number of Microbes Before and After Disinfecting the Commonly Used Medical Equipments Using Ethyl Alcohol

As shown in Table 5 there were significant numbers of microbes present before the Medical Equipments Before Disinfection (colony count) Replicate 1 3 18 12 13 Replicate 2 1 24 9 11 0 After Disinfection (colony count) Replicate 1 0 0 0 Replicate 2 0 0 0 0 Mean Standard Deviation Computed Value

Stethoscope BP Apparatus Thermometer Tape Measure

Replicate 1 3 18 12 13

Replicate 2 1 24 9 11

d=11.375 Sd=7.463 tc=4.311 instruments were disinfected. As seen, after the said disinfecting, microbes were removed on the instruments. The Level of significance is 0.05 levels. The t-test for correlated sample is as follows. Reject the null hypotheses if tc > 2.365 or tc < -2.365 with 7 degrees of freedom @ 0.05/2= 0.025. Since tc is greater than 2.365, we reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis, therefore, there exist a significant mean difference between the before and after microbial counts of the eight medical instruments. It implies that ethyl alcohol is effective in disinfecting the said instruments. Table 6 Number of Microbes Before Disinfecting the Commonly Used Medical Equipments Using Ethyl and Isopropyl Alcohol

40

As shown in Table 6 microbes were present on both samples of instruments which were to be disinfected. The Level of significance is 0.05. The t-test for independent samples are as follow. Medical Equipments Before Disinfection (colony count) Rep 1 Stethoscope BP Apparatus Thermometer Tape Measure 3 18 12 13 Rep 2 1 24 9 11 After Disinfection (colony count) Rep 1 3 18 12 13 d=11.375 Rep 2 1 24 9 11 Mean Computed Value X2 1 24 9 11
X2=11.375 S1=8.18 S2=7.463 Sp=7.83 tc= -0.383 S1 S2 Sp

X1 3 18 12 13
X1=9.875

Reject null hypothesis if tc 1.761 with degrees of freedom = n1 + n2 2 = 8 + 8 2 = 14 at

0.05. Since the computed value for t is less than 1.761, we will accept the null hypothesis; this means that there is no significant difference between isopropyl and ethyl alcohol in disinfecting medical instruments. Though the null hypothesis is confirmed, it does not mean/follow that ethyl is more effective than isopropyl alcohol in disinfecting medical instruments, maybe we do not have enough statistical evidence to prove/accept the alternative hypothesis. The limited number of sample and the results of microbial/colony counts (before) are some of the contributing factors for the results of these statistical test. Table 7

41 Number of Microbes Before Disinfecting the Commonly Used Medical Equipments Using Ethyl and Isopropyl Alcohol Medical Equipments Before Disinfection ( Ethyl ) Before Disinfection ( Isopropyl) Computed value

Replicate 1

Replicate 2

Replicate 1

Replicate 2

d1

d2

Sd1

Sd2

Sp

Stethoscope BP Apparatus Thermometer Tape Measure

3 18

1 24

19 14

11 21

12 13

9 11

0 3

0 11
d1=11.375

d=11.375

d2=9.875

Sd1=7.463

Sd=7.46

Sd2=8.18

Sp=7.83

tc=4.311

tc= 0.383

As shown in Table 7 microbes were present on both sample of instruments which were to be disinfected. The Level of significance is 0.05. The t-test for independent samples are as follow. Reject null hypothesis if tc -1.761 with df = n1 + n2 2 = 8 + 8 2 = 14 at = 0.05. Since the

computed value for t is greater than -1.761, we will accept the null hypothesis; this means that there is no significant difference between isopropyl and ethyl alcohol in disinfecting medical instruments. Though the null hypothesis is confirmed, it does not mean/follow that ethyl is more effective than isopropyl alcohol in disinfecting medical instruments; maybe we do not have enough statistical evidence to prove/accept the alternative hypothesis. The limited number of sample and the results of microbial/colony counts (before) are some of the contributing factors for the results of these statistical test.

42 Table 8 Number of Microbes Present in the Before and After Microbial Count of the Second Dilution Using Isopropyl Alcohol Medical Equipments Before Disinfection (colony count) Replicate 1 0
6 6 3

After Disinfection (colony count) Replicate 1 0 0 0 0 Replicate 2 0 0 0 0

Mean

Standard Deviation

Computed Value

Stethoscope BP Apparatus Thermometer Tape Measure

Replicate 2 0
10 2 0

Replicate 1 0
6

Replicate 2 0
10

6 3 d=3.375

2 0 Sd=3.622 tc=2.607

As shown in Table 8 there were microbes still present even after dilution 1. As seen, after the said disinfecting, microbes were removed on the instruments. The Level of significance is 0.05 levels. The t-test for correlated sample is as follows. The computed is tc > 2.365 therefore there exist a significant mean difference between the before and after microbial counts of the eight medical instruments.

43

Table 9 Number of Microbes Present in the Before and After Microbial Count of the Second Dilution Using Ethyl Alcohol Medical Equipments Before Disinfection (colony count) Replicate 1 0
6 6 3

After Disinfection (colony count) Replicate 1 0 0 0 0 Replicate 2 0 0 0 0

Mean

Standard Deviation

Computed Value

Stethoscope BP Apparatus Thermometer Tape Measure

Replicate 2 0
10 2 0

Replicate 1 0
6

Replicate 2 0
10

6 3 d=3.375

2 0 Sd=3.622 tc=2.607

As shown in Table 9 there were microbes still present even after dilution 1. As seen, after the said disinfecting, microbes were removed on the instruments. The Level of significance is 0.05 levels. The t-test for correlated sample is as follows. The computed is tc < 2.365 therefore there exist no significant mean difference between the before and after microbial counts of the eight medical instruments.

44 Table 10 Number of Microbes Present in the Before and After Microbial Count of the Third Dilution Using Isopropyl Alcohol

Medical Equipments

Before Disinfection (colony count) Replicate 1 0

0 0 0

After Disinfection (colony count) Replicate 1 0 0 0 0 Replicate 2 0 0 0 0 d=0

Mean

Standard Deviation

Computed Value

Stethoscope BP Apparatus Thermometer Tape Measure

Replicate 2 0
0 0 0

Replicate 1 0
0

Replicate 2 0
0

0 0

0 0 Sd=0 tc=0

As shown in Table 10 there are no microbes present after dilution 2.

45

Table 11 Number of Microbes Present in the Before and After Microbial Count of the Third Dilution Using Ethyl Alcohol Medical Equipments Before Disinfection (colony count) Replicate 1 0
0 0 0

After Disinfection (colony count) Replicate 1 0 0 0 0 Replicate 2 0 0 0 0 d=0

Mean

Standard Deviation

Computed Value

Stethoscope BP Apparatus Thermometer Tape Measure

Replicate 2 0
0 0 0

Replicate 1 0
0

Replicate 2 0
0

0 0

0 0 Sd=0 tc=0

As shown in Table 11 there are no microbes present after dilution 2.