Needlestick-prevention devices: we should already be there

Risk Reduction of Needle Stick Injuries Due to Continuous Shift from Unsafe to Safe Instruments at a German University Hospital

This study assessed protective effects of a continuous introduction of safe instruments in terms of reduction of needle stick injuries. The retrospective study analyzed correlations between the increasing proportion of safe instruments and a reduction of the incidence of needle stick injuries linked to such instruments in a German university hospital over 5 years. Incidents declined about 17.6% from 80.3 incidents per 1000 employees to 66.2, associated with an increase in the proportions of injuries due to instruments without protective mechanisms such as scalpels or hypodermic needles by 12.2%. For injuries due to venipuncture cannulae in various surgical and internal medicine departments, there was a negative association between the proportion of safe instruments and the incidence of injuries. For injection needles, portacath needles, and lancets in selected internal medicine departments, the number of injuries also dropped during this study interval. However, there was no clear-cut association with the percentage of safe instruments. This observational study suggests a correlation between the implementation of use of safe instruments and the reduction of needle stick injuries in a case of a graduated implementation. However, the effects are much less pronounced than in previous interventional studies.

The importance of implementing safe sharps practices in the laboratory setting in Europe

Healthcare workers are at risk of sharps injuries and subsequent infection from more than 40 bloodborne pathogens or species. Hepatitis B Virus (HBV), Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) and Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) together account for the vast majority of cases. The Directive 2010/32/EU “Prevention from sharp injuries in the hospital and healthcare sector”, issued to protect workers from these risks, requires an integrated approach to prevention including awareness-raising, education, training, elimination of unnecessary needles, safe procedures for sharps use and disposal, banning of recapping, vaccination, use of personal protective equipment, provision of safety-engineered devices, and appropriate surveillance, monitoring, response and follow-up.

As laboratories represent a high-risk setting both in the preanalytical and analytical phase, we reviewed accidents and prevention in this setting in the light of the new legislation.

Phlebotomy is the procedure carrying the highest risk of exposure and infection, involved in 30–50% of HIV and HCV cases detected in nationwide systems following accidental blood exposures implemented since the 1990s in Italy and France. In laboratories, problems in the management of sharps containers, recapping, needle disassembly by hand and blood transfer from syringes into tubes were observed and accounted for two-thirds of injuries. These accidents could be reduced through education and monitoring of behaviours, and introduction of medical devices incorporating safety-engineered protection mechanisms with appropriate training. Laboratory staff should be immunized against HBV, and know policies and procedures for the post-exposure management and prophylaxis. The management commitment to safety is crucial to ensure the necessary support to these changes.

Mucocutaneous blood contact: blood release behavior of safety peripheral intravenous catheters

BACKGROUND

Protection against needlestick injuries has significantly improved in recent years thanks to so-called "safety devices." However, a potential drawback occasionally reported by users is a risk of blood splashing. If this blood comes in contact with the mucous membranes, it could lead to an infection.

METHODS

Five safety peripheral intravenous catheter brands were examined in a laboratory test. To simulate the extreme situations, which may arise through human use, the introducer needle was withdrawn from the catheter at 2 different angles whereby an industrial robot was used to simulate the sequence of this movement. Each brand was tested 30 times. The experiment was carried out using radioactively labeled human whole blood. The measurements for the transmitted volume of blood was taken both from an artificial head and from a surface measuring 18.5 cm by 26.5 cm at a height of 30 cm above the catheter; scintigraphy was used to take the measurements.

RESULTS

The volume of blood droplets potentially splashing into the mucous membranes was in the range of 1 nL.

CONCLUSION

For normal virus concentrations in the blood of sick patients, this dose is too small to cause hepatitis C and HIV.

Preanalytical quality improvement: from dream to reality

Abstract Laboratory diagnostics (i.e., the total testing process) develops conventionally through a virtual loop, originally referred to as "the brain to brain cycle" by George Lundberg. Throughout this complex cycle, there is an inherent possibility that a mistake might occur. According to reliable data, preanalytical errors still account for nearly 60%-70% of all problems occurring in laboratory diagnostics, most of them attributable to mishandling procedures during collection, handling, preparing or storing the specimens. Although most of these would be "intercepted" before inappropriate reactions are taken, in nearly one fifth of the cases they can produce inappropriate investigations and unjustifiable increase in costs, while generating inappropriate clinical decisions and causing some unfortunate circumstances. Several steps have already been undertaken to increase awareness and establish a governance of this frequently overlooked aspect of the total testing process. Standardization and monitoring preanalytical variables is of foremost importance and is associated with the most efficient and well-organized laboratories, resulting in reduced operational costs and increased revenues. As such, this article is aimed at providing readers with significant updates on the total quality management of the preanalytical phase to endeavour further improvement for patient safety throughout this phase of the total testing process.

Needlestick injury rates according to different types of safety-engineered devices: results of a French multicenter study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the incidence of needlestick injuries (NSIs) among different models of safety-engineered devices (SEDs) (automatic, semiautomatic, and manually activated safety) in healthcare settings.

DESIGN

This multicenter survey, conducted from January 2005 through December 2006, examined all prospectively documented SED-related NSIs reported by healthcare workers to their occupational medicine departments. Participating hospitals were asked retrospectively to report the types, brands, and number of SEDs purchased, in order to estimate SED-specific rates of NSI. Setting. Sixty-one hospitals in France.

RESULTS

More than 22 million SEDs were purchased during the study period, and a total of 453 SED-related NSIs were documented. The mean overall frequency of NSIs was 2.05 injuries per 100,000 SEDs purchased. Device-specific NSI rates were compared using Poisson approximation. The 95% confidence interval was used to define statistical significance. Passive (fully automatic) devices were associated with the lowest NSI incidence rate. Among active devices, those with a semiautomatic safety feature were significantly more effective than those with a manually activated toppling shield, which in turn were significantly more effective than those with a manually activated sliding shield (P < .001, chi(2) test). The same gradient of SED efficacy was observed when the type of healthcare procedure was taken into account.

CONCLUSIONS

Passive SEDs are most effective for NSI prevention. Further studies are needed to determine whether their higher cost may be offset by savings related to fewer NSIs and to a reduced need for user training.