Reducing needlestick injuries through safety-engineered devices: results of a Japanese multi-centre study

Prevalence and influence factors of occupational exposure to blood and body fluids in registered Chinese nurses: a national cross-sectional study

Background

Occupational exposure to blood and body fluids poses a threat to medical providers and to nurses especially. This harm is not only physical, but psychology as well and can ultimately impact patient safety. This study aims to understand the prevalence of occupational exposure to blood and body fluids among Chinese registered nurses and explores the factors that influence this exposure.

Methods

A cross-sectional online survey was conducted for 31 province-level divisions in China, using a self-created questionnaire entitled Status Survey on Occupational Exposure in Nurses. Descriptive statistics were used to describe both the demographic characteristics of the respondents and the characteristics of occupational exposure. Categorical variables were presented as frequencies and percentage, and the relationship between possible influential factors and the occurrence of occupational exposure was determined using binary logistic regression.

Results

Out of a total of 20,791 nurses analyzed, over half (52.1%) of them had experienced occupational exposure to blood or body fluids, but over 1/3 (34.6%) of them did not ever report their exposures to a supervisor/official. The top three causes of under-reporting were: the source patient failed to test positive for infectious pathogens (43.6%), perception of a burdensome reporting process (24.6%), and indifferent attitude towards being infected (16.9%). Nurses who worked over 8 hours per day had higher risks of exposure (OR 1.199, 95% CI 1.130 to 1.272, P < 0.001, respectively). The occupational exposure risk from providing 1–2 types of PPE is 1.947 times that of providing 9–10 types of PPE (OR 1.947, 95% CI 1.740 to 2.178, P < 0.001). Likewise, the occupational exposure risk of providing 1–2 types of safety-engineered injection devices is 1.275 times of that of providing 5–6 types (OR 1.275, 95% CI 1.179 to 1.379, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Occupational exposure to blood and body fluids in registered nurses is common, but the rate of under-reporting such exposure is high. Implementing engineered “sharp” injury prevention devices, following exposure prevention procedures, giving sufficient education and training to healthcare personnel on exposure prevention and control, and developing exposure reporting policies are all steps that can both reduce exposure and increase its reporting.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12912-022-01090-y.

Barriers to and attitudes towards the use of safety engineered devices for paediatric cannulation in emergency care

This article describes a report of the attitudes towards and barriers to the use of safety cannulas in paediatric patients. The evaluation was prompted by a lack of engagement from both doctors and nurses who continued to use non-safety-engineered devices (non-SEDs) after safety-engineered devices (SEDs) were introduced into a paediatric emergency department (ED). A survey was conducted among doctors and nurses working in the paediatric ED with questions focusing on the participants' clinical experience, views on safety, access to training and device preference, providing both quantitative and qualitative data. The findings highlighted several issues, including a difference in opinion between professional groups towards safe sharps. Significant differences in access to training and education between doctors and nurses were also identified; including those with up-to-date training appearing more likely to use a SED than those without. Recommendations including strategies for improving compliance have been proposed, with a plan to conduct a clinical audit to measure compliance at a later date.

Non-Safety and Safety Device Sharp Injuries-Risk of Incidents, SEDs Availability, Attitudes and Perceptions of Nurses According to Cross-Sectional Survey in Poland

Sharp injuries are a serious issue among healthcare workers (HCWs). The aim of the study was to examine the frequency of sharps injuries among nurses (who have the most frequent contact with infectious material) when using devices with and without safety features, then to analyse the factors associated with such injuries and to compare the risk of injuries with safety engineered devices (SEDs) and non-safety engineered devices (non-SEDs). An online cross-sectional survey was completed between October 2021 and March 2022 by 280 nurses. The incidence of exposure to sharp injury during their professional life was 51.4%. The percentage of nurses experiencing a sharp injury in the year preceding the study was 29% and 9.6% for superficially and deep injury, respectively. Ampoules and conventional hollow-bore needles caused the most injuries (25.92% and 22.64% of nurses in the last year). Factors including sex (males), age and seniority (elderly), education (higher), work exhaustion and being left-handed were associated with the occurrence of conventional hollow-bore needle injuries. In the case of SEDs: age, seniority and right/left-handed were the most frequent risk factors associated with the occurrence of sharp injuries. SEDs injuries were much less frequent than non-SEDs. There was a significant difference between the risk of injuries with safety and non-safety needles, central cannulas and ampoules. Fisher's exact test (p-value = 0.000) and positive Spearman's rho statistics (0.2319, p-value = 0.0001) confirmed that in accredited hospitals, the availability of safety needles was higher. Almost half of the nurses (n = 115, 41.07%) stated that staff had little influence on the type of medical sharp instruments supplied. To reduce the risk of nurse injuries, access to medical devices with safe protection mechanisms should be ensured, the use of sharp instruments should be limited where possible, managers should consult nurses regarding the choice of safe devices, and training programs on the proper use of SEDs should be available.

Comparing risk changes of needlestick injuries between countries adopted and not adopted the needlestick safety and prevention act: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether countries that adopted the Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act (NSPA) achieved a reduced risk of needlestick injuries (NSIs).

METHOD

In this meta-analysis, 3 international databases (Embase, PubMed, and MEDLINE EBSCO) and 1 Chinese database (Airiti Library) were searched using appropriate keywords to retrieve relevant articles, including multiyear NSI incidences that were published after 2010. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Prevalence Studies was used to evaluate article prevalence. A binary random-effects model was used to estimate risk ratio as summary effect. A log scale was used to evaluate differences in risk ratios of NSIs between countries that adopted versus those that did not adopt the NSPA.

RESULTS

In total, 11 articles were included in the meta-analysis from 9 countries, and NSI incidence rates were surveyed between 1993 and 2016. The risk ratios of NSIs in countries with and without the NSPA were 0.78 (95% CI, 0.67-0.91) and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.85-1.12), respectively, and the ratio of risk ratios was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.65-0.98). Reduction in NSI incidence was more prominent in nurses than in physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the mandatory use of safety-engineered medical devices in countries that adopted the NSPA had lower NSI incidence in healthcare workers compared with countries without needlestick safety and prevention regulatory policies. Further studies are needed to develop preventive strategies to protect against NSIs in physicians, which should be incorporated into the standards of care established by national regulatory agencies.

Education and training for preventing sharps injuries and splash exposures in healthcare workers

BACKGROUND

In healthcare settings, health care workers (HCWs) are at risk of acquiring infectious diseases through sharps injuries and splash exposures to blood or bodily fluids. Education and training interventions are widely used to protect workers' health and safety and to prevent sharps injuries. In certain countries, they are part of obligatory professional development for HCWs.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of education and training interventions compared to no intervention or alternative interventions for preventing sharps injuries and splash exposures in HCWs.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, NHSEED, Science Citation Index Expanded, CINAHL and OSH-update (from all time until February 2016). In addition, we searched the databases of Global Health, AustHealth and Web of Science (from all time until February 2016). The original search strategy was re-run in November 2019, and again in February 2020. In April 2020, the search strategy was updated and run in CINAHL, MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science (from 2016 to current).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-randomized trials (cluster-RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), interrupted time series (ITS) study designs, and controlled before-and-after studies (CBA), that evaluated the effect of education and training interventions on the incidence of sharps injuries and splash exposures compared to no-intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors (SC, HL) independently selected studies, and extracted data for the included studies. Studies were analyzed, risk of bias assessed (HL, JL) , and pooled using random-effect meta-analysis, where applicable, according to their design types. As primary outcome we looked for sharps injuries and splash exposures and calculated them as incidence of injuries per 1000 health care workers per year. For the quality of evidence we applied GRADE for the main outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies met our inclusion criteria: one cluster-RCT, three CCTs, and three ITS studies. The baseline rates of sharps injuries varied from 43 to 203 injuries per 1000 HCWs per year in studies with hospital registry systems. In questionnaire-based studies, the rates of sharps injuries were higher, from 1800 to 7000 injuries per 1000 HCWs per year.  The majority of studies utilised a combination of education and training interventions, including interactive demonstrations, educational presentations, web-based information systems, and marketing tools which we found similar enough to be combined. In the only cluster-RCT (n=796) from a high-income country, the single session educational workshop decreased sharps injuries at 12 months follow-up, but this was not statistically significant either measured as registry-based reporting of injuries (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.30, low-quality evidence) or as self-reported injuries (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.21, very low-quality evidence) In three CCTs educational interventions decreased sharps injuries at two months follow-up (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.95, 330 participants, very low-quality evidence). In the meta-analysis of two ITS studies with a similar injury rate, (N=2104), the injury rate decreased immediately post-intervention by 9.3 injuries per 1000 HCWs per year (95% CI -14.9 to -3.8). There was a small non-significant decrease in trend over time post-intervention of 2.3 injuries per 1000 HCWs per year (95% CI -12.4 to 7.8, low-quality evidence). One ITS study (n=255) had a seven-fold higher injury rate compared to the other two ITS studies and only three data points before and after the intervention. The study reported a change in injury rate of 77 injuries per 1000 HCWs (95% CI -117.2 to -37.1, very low-quality evidence) immediately after the intervention, and a decrease in trend post-intervention of 32.5 injuries per 1000 HCWs per year (95% CI -49.6 to -15.4, very low quality evidence). None of the studies allowed analyses of splash exposures separately from sharps injuries. None of the studies reported rates of blood-borne infections in patients or staff. There was very low-quality evidence of short-term positive changes in process outcomes such as knowledge in sharps injuries and behaviors related to injury prevention.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found low- to very low-quality evidence that education and training interventions may cause small decreases in the incidence of sharps injuries two to twelve months after the intervention. There was very low-quality evidence that educational interventions may improve knowledge and behaviors related to sharps injuries in the short term but we are uncertain of this effect. Future studies should focus on developing valid measures of sharps injuries for reliable monitoring. Developing educational interventions in high-risk settings is another priority.

Causes of Needlestick and Sharps Injuries When Using Devices with and without Safety Features

Safety-engineered devices (SEDs) have been developed to protect healthcare personnel (HCP) from needlestick and sharps injuries (NSIs). The aim of this study was to analyze NSIs associated with SEDs and non-SEDs among HCP in hospitals, medical offices and care facilities. Records from online questionnaires on NSIs were used. Causes of NSIs were compared for SED use and healthcare setting. A sample of 835 files was included. Injuries with SEDs accounted for 35.0% of all NSIs, whereas the proportions were higher in medical offices and lower in care facilities. NSIs in nurses were more often associated with SEDs than NSIs in physicians. NSIs from intravenous needles were associated with SEDs in more than 60% of cases in hospitals and medical offices and in about 30.0% of cases in care facilities. In contrast, suturing was associated with every fourth NSI in hospitals, of which fewer than 10.0% were associated with SEDs. In care facilities, SEDs were involved in 36.1% of NSIs during subcutaneous injections. NSIs during disposal accounted for 29.2% of total NSIs, of which 36.1% were associated with SEDs. Frequent reasons for SED-associated NSIs were technical problems, unexpected patient movement and problems during disposal. Our analysis shows that many NSIs are associated with SEDs. Continuous training is necessary in the handling and disposal of SEDs.

Needlestick injuries: the role of safety-engineered devices in prevention

The first documented mention of a needlestick injury (NSI) in the medical literature appeared in 1906. Despite growth in academic and clinical interest for NSI prevention, a global report identified that approximately 3 million healthcare workers have suffered percutaneous exposure to blood-borne pathogens. Legislation is an important component of NSI prevention. Unfortunately, the impact of legislation may not always reduce the incidence of NSI as much as expected. Safety-engineered device (SED) implementation has demonstrated a substantial reduction in NSI rates compared with non-SEDs. More importantly, passive SEDs are 10 times less likely to be connected with an NSI incident.

Economic burden of needlestick injuries among healthcare workers in China

Objective: To estimate the economic burden of needlestick injuries (NSIs) among healthcare workers (HCWs) in China.Design: A model was built to evaluate the economic burden of NSIs.Methods: The cost model was developed from a societal perspective, including both direct and indirect costs, with lifetime horizon. The direct costs were categorized into infection prevention and treatment of infections. The indirect cost included productivity loss of both HCWs and his/her family members due to the blood-borne infections. Sub-group analyses were conducted to estimate the cost per NSI when the source patient (SP) was confirmed with hepatitis B virus/hepatitis C virus/human immunodeficiency virus (HBV/HCV/HIV) infection. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted for all parameters to examine the robustness of the result.Results: The model projected a total cost of ¥699 for each NSI (direct and indirect cost were ¥553 and ¥146, respectively). The cost per NSI when the SP was confirmed with HBV/HCV/HIV was ¥4,238, ¥18,404, and ¥6,152, respectively. The total economic burden of NSIs among HCWs in China was estimated to be ¥5.8 billion, and about half of the cost was associated with NSIs in nurses, at ¥2.8 billion.Limitations: This study did not incorporate the costs of litigation/psychological, and the prevalence of the infections was based on the general population, so the actual costs per NSI may be underestimated. More real-world studies of treatment cost about HBV/HCV are needed to further supporting this study.Conclusions: The economic burden of NSIs among HCWs in China is substantial. Comprehensive NSI prevention programs, including implementation of safety needles and devices, have high potential for healthcare institutions to achieve downstream cost savings and cost offsets.

Cost of Blood and Body Fluid Occupational Exposure Management in Beijing, China

(1) Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the cost of blood and body fluid (BBF) occupational exposure management in healthcare facilities in Beijing, China. (2) Methods: A survey was conducted from August to October 2018, seeking general information concerning the management of occupational exposure to BBF and the cost of the management process. In total, 216 healthcare facilities were surveyed, using a stratified-selection method. The collected information included BBF management protocols, direct costs such as laboratory testing fees, drug costs and medical service fees, as well as indirect costs, such as wages, lost working time, injury compensation, and psychological counseling time. (3) Results: The cost of post-BBF exposure management varied according to the infection status of the exposure source patients, the immune status of exposed employees, and the location and level of healthcare facilities. The mean values of management cost were determined to be hepatitis B (HBV)-positive source (RMB 5936/USD 897), hepatitis C (HCV)-positive source (RMB 5738/USD 867), Treponema pallidum (TP)-positive source (RMB 4508/USD 681), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive source (RMB 12,709/USD 1920), and unknown sources (RMB 7441/USD 1124). The survey also revealed that some healthcare facilities have insufficient post-exposure management. (4) Conclusions: A better post-exposure management system is needed in Beijing to reduce both infection risk after exposure and costs.

Epidemic characteristics and related risk factors of occupational exposure for pediatric health care workers in Chinese public hospitals: a cross-sectional study

Background

Health care workers have a high risk of occupational exposure. However, the risk of occupational exposure for pediatric health care workers has not been acknowledged in previous studies. The purpose of this study was to investigate the occupational exposure rate of pediatric health care workers in Chinese public hospitals, to explore risk factors for occupational exposure, and to put forward corresponding countermeasures to reduce occupational exposure of pediatric health care workers and protect their physical and mental health.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted with pediatric health care workers in 43 hospitals in 15 provinces in eastern, central, and western China between July and October 2018. With this sample, we computed the descriptive statistics of the demographic characteristics, calculated the frequency of various types of occupational exposure, and tested risk factors for occupational exposure using a chi-squared test and binary logistic regression analysis.

Results

Most respondents were nursing staff (61.1%) and workers with a low-ranking professional title (50.5%). The most common style of occupational exposure in our sample was a hazard in the work environment (62.6%). Notably, physicians were less likely to experience occupational exposure than nurses (OR = 0.320, 95% CI = 0.241, 0.426). Meanwhile, pediatric health care workers who interpreted the doctor-patient relationship as harmonious (OR = 0.304, 95% CI = 0.152, 0.607) were less likely to suffer occupational exposure.

Conclusion

Pediatric health care workers in Chinese public hospitals have a high occupational exposure risk and the risk factors are complex and diverse. The state, society, hospitals should acknowledge this issue and develop strategies to protect the physical and mental health of pediatric health care workers.

Use of safety syringes for administration of local anaesthesia among a sample of UK primary care dental professionals

Background

Safer sharps devices (SSDs) are commercially available and their use is mandated through UK legislation.

Aim

To identify the current usage of SSDs in UK primary care dentistry.

Method

A cross-sectional survey was administered to delegates at the 2017 British Dental Association (BDA) Conference and Exhibition in Manchester, and at the 2017 BDA Scottish Conference and Exhibition in Glasgow. The survey covered a range of questions relating to sharps injuries and use of traditional and safety syringes for delivery of local anaesthesia. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS Version 22 (IBM Corp., 2013) and included chi-square and Fisher's exact tests.

Results

Seven hundred and ninety-six delegates participated, of whom 396 (49.7%) were using safety syringes for delivery of local anaesthesia. Of the 166 participants who had experienced a sharps injury in the past year, 76 (45.8%) worked in facilities that most commonly used SSDs for delivery of local anaesthesia.

Conclusion

Our results indicate that a significant number of dental practices in our sample have not adopted SSDs and suggest sharps injuries are still being sustained in some practices using SSDs. Further epidemiological research is required to provide strong evidence for the effectiveness of SSDs and reasons why SSDs have not been fully adopted in UK primary dental care.

Devices for preventing percutaneous exposure injuries caused by needles in healthcare personnel

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous exposure injuries from devices used for blood collection or for injections expose healthcare workers to the risk of blood borne infections such as hepatitis B and C, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Safety features such as shields or retractable needles can possibly contribute to the prevention of these injuries and it is important to evaluate their effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits and harms of safety medical devices aiming to prevent percutaneous exposure injuries caused by needles in healthcare personnel versus no intervention or alternative interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, NHSEED, Science Citation Index Expanded, CINAHL, Nioshtic, CISdoc and PsycINFO (until 11 November 2016).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCT), controlled before and after studies (CBA) and interrupted time-series (ITS) designs of the effect of safety engineered medical devices on percutaneous exposure injuries in healthcare staff.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two of the authors independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data. We synthesized study results with a fixed-effect or random-effects model meta-analysis where appropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six RCTs with 1838 participants, two cluster-RCTs with 795 participants and 73,454 patient days, five CBAs with approximately 22,000 participants and eleven ITS with an average of 13.8 data points. These studies evaluated safe modifications of blood collection systems, intravenous (IV) systems, injection systems, multiple devices, sharps containers and legislation on the implementation of safe devices. We estimated the needlestick injury (NSI) rate in the control groups to be about one to five NSIs per 1000 person-years. There were only two studies from low- or middle-income countries. The risk of bias was high in 20 of 24 studies. Safe blood collection systems:We found one RCT that found a safety engineered blood gas syringe having no considerable effect on NSIs (Relative Risk (RR) 0.2, 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) 0.01 to 4.14, 550 patients, very low quality evidence). In one ITS study, safe blood collection systems decreased NSIs immediately after the introduction (effect size (ES) -6.9, 95% CI -9.5 to -4.2) but there was no further decrease over time (ES -1.2, 95% CI -2.5 to 0.1, very low quality evidence). Another ITS study evaluated an outdated recapping shield, which we did not consider further. Safe Intravenous systemsThere was very low quality evidence in two ITS studies that NSIs were reduced with the introduction of safe IV devices, whereas one RCT and one CBA study provided very low quality evidence of no effect. However, there was moderate quality evidence produced by four other RCT studies that these devices increased the number of blood splashes when the safety system had to be engaged actively (relative risk (RR) 1.6, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.36). In contrast there was low quality evidence produced by two RCTs of passive systems that showed no effect on blood splashes. Yet another RCT produced low quality evidence that a different safe active IV system also decreased the incidence of blood leakages. Safe injection devicesThere was very low quality evidence provided by one RCT and one CBA study showing that introduction of safe injection devices did not considerably change the NSI rate. One ITS study produced low quality evidence showing that the introduction of safe passive injection systems had no effect on NSI rate when compared to safe active injection systems. Multiple safe devicesThere was very low quality evidence from one CBA study and two ITS studies. According to the CBA study, the introduction of multiple safe devices resulted in a decrease in NSI,whereas the two ITS studies found no change. Safety containersOne CBA study produced very low quality evidence showing that the introduction of safety containers decreased NSI. However, two ITS studies evaluating the same intervention found inconsistent results. LegislationThere was low to moderate quality evidence in two ITS studies that introduction of legislation on the use of safety-engineered devices reduced the rate of NSIs among healthcare workers. There was also low quality evidence which showed a decrease in the trend over time for NSI rates.Twenty out of 24 studies had a high risk of bias and the lack of evidence of a beneficial effect could be due to both confounding and bias. This does not mean that these devices are not effective.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For safe blood collection systems, we found very low quality evidence of inconsistent effects on NSIs. For safe passive intravenous systems, we found very low quality evidence of a decrease in NSI and a reduction in the incidence of blood leakage events but moderate quality evidence that active systems may increase exposure to blood. For safe injection needles, the introduction of multiple safety devices or the introduction of sharps containers the evidence was inconsistent or there was no clear evidence of a benefit. There was low to moderate quality evidence that introduction of legislation probably reduces NSI rates.More high-quality cluster-randomised controlled studies that include cost-effectiveness measures are needed, especially in countries where both NSIs and blood-borne infections are highly prevalent.

Comparing non-safety with safety device sharps injury incidence data from two different occupational surveillance systems

The United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Bloodborne Pathogens Standard as amended by the Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act requiring the use of safety-engineered medical devices to prevent needlesticks and sharps injuries has been in place since 2001. Injury changes over time include differences between those from non-safety compared with safety-engineered medical devices. This research compares two US occupational incident surveillance systems to determine whether these data can be generalized to other facilities and other countries either with legislation in place or considering developing national policies for the prevention of sharps injuries among healthcare personnel.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Safety-Engineered Devices

OBJECTIVE To estimate the cost-effectiveness of safety-engineered devices (SEDs) relative to non-SEDs for winged steel needles, intravenous catheter stylets, suture needles, and insulin pen needles. DESIGN Decision analysis modeling. PARTICIPANTS Hypothetical cohort of healthcare workers who utilized needle devices. METHODS We developed a decision-analytic model to estimate and compare the life-cycle costs and benefits for SED and non-SED needle devices. For this cost-effectiveness analysis, we quantified the total direct medical cost per needlestick injury, number of needlestick injuries avoided, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the robustness of the base-case analysis. RESULTS In the base-case analysis, we calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of SED winged steel needles, intravenous catheter stylets, suture needles, and insulin pen needles to be $2,633, $13,943, $1,792, and $1,269 per needlestick injury avoided, respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed that the calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio values for using SEDs did not fall below zero even after adjusting the values of each parameter. CONCLUSION The use of SED needle devices would not produce cost savings for hospitals. Government intervention may be needed to systematically protect healthcare workers in Japan from the risk of bloodborne pathogen infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;37:1012-1021.