Worldwide, the safe washing of medical textiles has always been a crucial aspect of healthcare in≈fection control. Many countries and regions have implemente♦d legislation or industry standards requiring healthcare facilities to us<e hygienic isolation washers (double-door or twin-door w÷ashers). These requirements are primarily based on strict control of cross-infe↕ction risks and the promotion of industry best practices. Following are interpretat™ions of relevant national and regional regulations:

1. United States

The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in iσts "Guidelines for Environmental Infection Control in Healthcare Se™ttings," clearly recommends that the washing of medical textiles should strictly s≈eparate contaminated areas from clean areas, and double-¶door washers, due to their physical isolation function, are highlighted' as key equipment. Furthermore, the Association of periOperative Registered Nurses (AORN≈) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) also emphasize the n≤ecessity of such equipment. In some states, such as Californiεa, the use of double-door washers is mandated by law, while other states follow industr¥y best practices.

2. European Union Countries

The EU standard EN 14065 (Risk analysis and biocontaminati₩on control of textile hygiene treatment, i.e., the RABC system) requires thλat the washing process strictly isolates contaminated a↓nd clean areas, indirectly promoting the application of double-door washers. Hospitals in Ger÷many, France, the United Kingdom, and other countries generally adher↑e to this standard, and some countries enforce it th×rough local regulations. For example, the German Hospital Hygiene Act e>xplicitly requires that the washing of medical textiles mus♥t use isolation equipment to prevent cross-contamination.

3. Canada

Health Canada and CSA standards (such as Z314.23) recomβmend using double-door washers when handling infectious textiles and consider them essenλtial equipment. Large public hospitals and private la™undry companies in Canada generally adopt such equipment to ♥meet infection control requirements.

4. Australia and New Zealand

Australian Standard AS/NZS 4146 (Hygiene Management of Laundrσy Processes) requires that the washing of medical textiles must achieve physical separation betwe¥en contaminated and clean areas, and double-door washers are a common solution. Public •hospitals and third-party laundry service providers ge"nerally use this type of equipment.

5. Brazil

Brazil's medical laundry regulations have been gra♦dually improved in recent years. The Brazilian National Health Surveillance Agen↔cy (ANVISA) guidelines emphasize the strict separation of contaminated and clean areas dπuring the washing of medical textiles. Although the€re is currently no mandatory requirement to use doubl↑e-door washers, regulations clearly recommend the use of isolation​ equipment in high-risk areas (such as infectious disease hospitals and operating room te§xtile washing). Furthermore, Brazilian regulations do not men↓tion the use of tunnel washing systems, but rather tend to support equ₹ipment and technologies that effectively prevent cross-contaminati₩on.

6. Other Regions

In the Middle East, such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE, some countr​ies have adopted European and American standards in newly bui∑lt hospitals, requiring the use of isolation washers. In Asia, such as Japan and Sinαgapore, although there are no nationwide mandatory regulations, high-end medical ins​titutions and infectious disease hospitals often proactively adopt double-door equipment.

Key Summary

• Mandatory requirement countries: Germany, France (some regions), United States (s₽ome states), Canada (high-risk institutions).

• Recommended standard countries: EU member states (EN ©14065), Australia, New Zealand, Japan, etc.

• International trend: Even in countries without m‍andatory requirements, the adoption of double-door was✔hers is considered "best practice" for infection control, especially when handling surgical drβessings and textiles from isolation wards.

Professional Discussion and Suggestions on the WS/T508 Standard

• Standard Lagging Issue

Currently, some countries and regions have legislated mandatory requirements for medical ®institutions to use double-door washing machines, but δthe revised version of WS/T508 has not yet made corresponding adjustments. In contrasγt, international practice has regarded double-door washing machines as "best practice" for infe♦ction control, while the revised draft of WS/T508 still retains the clause "If used…", indire↕ctly leading to the use of substandard products. It is suggested to ₽further demonstrate the rationality of this clause, which s®hould not contradict the microbial requirement indicators.

• Standard System Connectivity

The EN 14065 standard promotes equipment upgrades through a washing process that strictly ↔isolates contaminated and clean areas, while WS/T508 propos←es zoning requirements in building layout but does not explicitly re∑strict equipment that cannot meet zoning requirements, r∑esulting in insufficient enforcement of the standard. It is recom£mended to supplement the standard with specific equi$pment requirements to ensure the effective implementation of zoning requirements.

• Risk Prevention Gaps

The current standard does not adequately reflect the specific requirements for ♥reducing infection rates. In particular, for newly built hospita≥ls and social service institutions, if substandard equipment is used, it will be difficult to ∏replace it in the short term, which may cause long-term patient contact with tex≈tiles exceeding microbial standards, increasing the risk of in₽fection. It is recommended to supplement relevant scientific evidence and countermeasur±es to improve the risk prevention mechanism of the standard.

The above suggestions aim to improve the scientificity and practicalityβ of the standard for reference by the standard-setting department.