This study aimed to assess aseptic practices in circulating nurses working in public hospitals in Shiraz. The psychometric properties of the Persian version of the tool were confirmed. The circulating nurses’ scores of aseptic practices were higher than the average level. However, in some behaviors, their scores were at a lower level than the average. Age and work experience were negatively correlated with the “establishment of a sterile field” subscale. Female nurses had better scores in the “establishment of a sterile field” subscale and total score, and the circulating nurses who held a bachelor’s degree had significantly higher scores than the nurses who had an associate degree.
The circulating nurses had higher than average scores in all three subscales. It could be said that the studied nurses paid attention to the aseptic technique and had good knowledge of them, which is vital to reducing morbidity, mortality, and surgery costs (
14). This result is in line with the results of a study by Abraham et al. (
14), who concluded that the majority of studied nurses had good aseptic practices. Labrague reported excellent knowledge of concepts of sterile practices (
21). Aseptic practices are accepted as fundamental standards in operating rooms, and circulating nurses were expected to show a mastery of them. The monitoring of the sterile field is an essential responsibility of circulating nurses, as issues in aseptic practices challenge every surgical team member (
22). “Disestablishment of a sterile field” was the subscale with the highest score. The aforementioned results are similar to the results of a study by Aholaakko and Metsala (
13). Probably, this result is due to the small number of items in the aforementioned subscale (3 items) and the ease of ensuring these items.
Although the total mean and subscales scores were higher than the average level, several items scored lower than average. The reasons for low scores might be different. For example, the use of indicator gloves is limited in the studied population, probably due to insufficient supplies in the operating room. This result contrasts with Laine and Aarnio’s findings, which reported high rates of using indicator gloves (
23). The use of indicator gloves can provide better protection, especially in high-risk operations, by detecting the glove perforation and enabling the quick change of perforated gloves (
24). It is an essential issue because glove perforation occurs frequently and could cause the transmission of infectious agents. If the hospital managers equip the operating room with indicator gloves, the scores of this item will be increased.
Lower scores were reported in “keeping the operating room doors closed” and “limiting the number of the clinicians in the operating room” items, which can increase the risk of surgical site infections (
25). The aforementioned result is in line with the results of several former studies in which there was a high number of door openings and clinician traffic in operating rooms (
26,
27). It could be due to the hierarchy in the operating room that allows the surgeons and surgical residents to enter the rooms. Some of the circulating nurses do nothing in this regard. Revising some existing hierarchy-related behaviors in the operating room can be helpful, as it was claimed that setting some policies in operating rooms could be helpful (
28). Retrieving or delivering supplies could also be a reason for high foot traffic in the operating room (
29). Therefore, circulating nurses could prevent this issue by preparing all the needed supplies before surgery.
The documentation of perioperative nursing care is crucial to patient safety (
30). Defects of aseptic practices should be recorded, as it can help prevent them. Similar to the present study, international papers reported variations in documentation practice in operating room nursing. Incomplete knowledge and poor understanding in this regard can endanger patient safety (
30). Therefore, circulating nurses should be trained on the proper documentation of the aseptic technique.
The item related to using filter needles had the lowest score in this study. Filter needles reduce glass particle contamination and can reduce patient harm through injections (
31). The availability of filter needles can affect their use. Training can increase the acceptability and more frequent use of filter needles (
32). Therefore, preparing filter needles and providing training regarding their use can be helpful in the improvement of this aseptic practice item. Supervision and setting norms could help increase the scores of these behaviors. The development of guidelines could also be practical to enhance the scores of the aforementioned items (
33).
In this study, there were relationships between demographics and aseptic practice scores. The results showed that aseptic practices’ scores negatively correlated with age and work experience. It seems that more experienced circulating nurses ignored some of the items of the “establishment of a sterile field” subscale, probably due to overconfidence. This result is different from the results of several previous studies (
13,
34). It was claimed that senior nurses show more assertiveness and have definite opinions regarding the guidelines (
35). Nevertheless, in this study, less-experienced circulating nurses had better scores in the “establishment of a sterile field” subscale. It seems that the newly-hired nurses pay more attention to aseptic practices. The different results might also be due to cultural differences and operating room norms. The result of better scores of the circulating nurses with a higher academic degree is in line with the results of previous studies (
36). It could be said that more years of academic education can yield a more solid approach toward aseptic practices.
This study had some limitations. As this is a cross-sectional study, the cause and effect of the variables could not be determined. It is suggested to carry out further studies to evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions in improving aseptic practices. Moreover, the aseptic practices of all surgical team members could be assessed. The results might be generalizable to orthopedic and general surgeries.
Circulating nurses’ aseptic practices scores were higher than average in the subscales; however, they had low scores in several items. Supplying the hospitals with necessary materials, using appropriate guidelines about aseptic practices, supervising circulating nurses, using educational programs and retraining courses to increase and update their knowledge of aseptic practices, and setting appropriate policies can help improve the use of aseptic practices.