We need your support to keep TheyWorkForYou running and make sure people across the UK can continue to hold their elected representatives to account.

Donate to our crowdfunder

Medical Equipment: Irradiation

Health written question – answered on 8th May 2008.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Tim Loughton Tim Loughton Shadow Minister (Children)

To ask the Secretary of State for Health

(1) what consideration his Department has given to the use of ultra-violet germicidal irradiation disinfection devices in the healthcare sector;

(2) whether his Department has investigated the use of ultra-violet germicidal irradiation technology in combating tuberculosis infection;

(3) what plans his Department has to commission research into the effects and merits of ultra-violet germicidal irradiation technology; what assessment has been made of (a) the costs and (b) the merits of introducing such technology; and if he will make a statement.

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Minister of State (Department of Health) (Public Health)

The Rapid Review Panel (RRP) has reviewed 28 technologies which utilise ultra-violet light. All of these technologies are air purification systems. From these 28 products:

two were awarded a recommendation 2 (basic research and development has been completed and the product may have potential value; in use evaluations/trials are now needed in an national health service clinical setting);

10 received a recommendation 3 (a potentially useful new concept but insufficiently validated; more research and development is required before it is ready for evaluation in practice); seven received a recommendation 4 (not a significant improvement on equipment/materials/products already available which claim to contribute to reducing health care associated infection; no further consideration needed, or unlikely to contribute to the reduction of health care associated infection; no further consideration needed); eight received a recommendation 5(insufficient clarity/evidence presented to enable full review of the product); and one received a recommendation 6 (an already well established product that does not merit further consideration by the panel).

Further information can be found on the RRP's website at:

www.hpa.org.uk/infections/topics__az/rapid_review/default.htm

Unless a technology is awarded a recommendation 1 from the RRP and considered to be clinically effective, the Department does not undertake assessments of cost effectiveness or, of the benefits involved in introducing such technology.

Research has shown that ultra-violet disinfection can be valuable in certain circumstances to reduce airborne bacteria.

Does this answer the above question?

Yes0 people think so

No1 person thinks not

Would you like to ask a question like this yourself? Use our Freedom of Information site.

Annotations

Grace Filby
Posted on 9 May 2008 11:21 am (Report this annotation)

I hope the Department of Health, the Health Protection Agency and the Rapid Review Panel will now quickly realise that these were rather understatements and there was an oversight with at least one of the technologies submitted to the RRP.

If you would like some material to refer to, please see http://www.relax-well.co.uk/multimedia.html and http://www.relax-well.co.uk/good_luck.html .