You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
LETTER
Bacterial contamination of oral sucrose solutions
  1. Denise M Harrison1,
  2. Andrew J Daley2,
  3. Karen Rautenbacher2,
  4. Peter M Loughnan3,
  5. Elizabeth Manias4,
  6. Linda J Johnston5
  1. 1School of Nursing, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
  2. 2Department of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, The Royal Children’s Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
  3. 3Department of Neonatology, Royal Children’s Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
  4. 4School of Nursing, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
  5. 5School of Nursing, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
  1. Correspondence to:
    D Harrison
    School of Nursing, The University of Melbourne, Level 1, 723 Swanston Street, Carlton, 3053 Australia; d.harrison{at}pgrad.unimelb.edu.au

https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.2006.108084

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Sweet-tasting solutions such as sucrose and glucose have been shown in a large number of studies to be efficacious in reducing procedure-related pain in newborn infants.1 However, issues concerning the risk of bacterial contamination of such solutions have been raised. Abu-Arafeh et al reported significant bacterial contamination of a 10% sucrose solution occurring 24 hours after preparation.2 To further examine this issue, an audit was conducted to determine the growth of bacteria in both refrigerated and unrefrigerated 33% (w/v) sucrose solution over a one-month period. This concentration of sucrose is routinely used for procedure-related pain reduction in infants in the tertiary referral neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) where this audit took place.3,4

    The sucrose solution was prepared in the Pharmacy Department of the tertiary …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Funding: The laboratory cultures were financed by the Royal Children’s Hospital.

    • Competing interests: None.