Use of safety devices and the prevention of percutaneous injuries among healthcare workers

Safety interventions for the prevention of accidents at work: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Limited knowledge regarding the relative effectiveness of workplace accident prevention approaches creates barriers to informed decision-making by policy makers, public health practitioners, workplace, and worker advocates.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effectiveness of broad categories of safety interventions in preventing accidents at work. The review aims to compare effects of safety interventions to no intervention, usual activities, or alternative intervention, and if possible, to examine which constituent components of safety intervention programs contribute more strongly to preventing accidents at work in a given setting or context.

DATE SOURCES

Studies were identified through electronic bibliographic searches, government policy databanks, and Internet search engines. The last search was carried out on July 9, 2015. Gray literature were identified by searching OSH ROM and Google. No language or date restrictions were applied. Searches done between February and July of 2015 included PubMed (1966), Embase (1980), CINAHL (1981), OSH ROM (NIOSHTIC 1977, HSELINE 1977, CIS-DOC 1974), PsycINFO (1806), EconLit (1969), Web of Science (1969), and ProQuest (1861); dates represent initial availability of each database. Websites of pertinent institutions (NIOSH, Perosh) were also searched.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS

Included studies had to focus on accidents at work, include an evaluation of a safety intervention, and have used injuries at work, or a relevant proxy, as an outcome measure. Experimental, quasi-experimental, and observational study designs were utilized, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before and after (CBA) studies, and observational designs using serial measures (interrupted time series, retrospective cohort designs, and before and after studies using multiple measures). Interventions were classified by approach at the individual or group level, and broad categories based on the prevention approach including modification of: Attitudes (through information and persuasive campaign messaging).Behaviors (through training, incentives, goal setting, feedback/coaching).Physiological condition (by physical training).Climate/norms/culture (by coaching, feedback, modification of safety management/leadership).Structural conditions (including physical environment, engineering, legislation and enforcement, sectorial-level norms). When combined approaches were used, interventions were termed "multifaceted," and when an approach(es) is applied to more than one organizational level (e.g., individual, group, and/or organization), it is termed "across levels."

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

Narrative report review captured industry (NACE), work setting, participant characteristics, theoretical basis for approach, intervention fidelity, research design, risk of bias, contextual detail, outcomes measures and results. Additional items were extracted for studies with serial measures including approaches to improve internal validity, assessments of reasonable statistical approaches (Effective Practice of Organization of Care [EPOC] criteria) and overall inference. Random-effects inverse variance weighted meta-analytic methods were used to synthesize odds ratios, rate ratios, or standardized mean differences for the outcomes for RCT and CBA studies with low or moderate levels of heterogeneity. For studies with greater heterogeneity and those using serial measures, we relied on narrative analyses to synthesize findings.

RESULTS

In total 100 original studies were included for synthesis analysis, including 16 RCT study designs, 30 CBA study designs, and 54 studies using serial measures (ITS study designs). These studies represented 120 cases of safety interventions. The number of participants included 31,971,908 individuals in 59 safety interventions, 417,693 groups/firms in 35 safety interventions, and 15,505 injuries in 17 safety interventions. Out of the 59 safety interventions, two were evaluating national prevention measures, which alone accounted for 31,667,110 individuals. The remaining nine safety interventions used other types of measures, such as safety exposure, safety observations, gloves or claim rates. Strong evidence supports greater effects being achieved with safety interventions directed toward the group or organization level rather than individual behavior change. Engineering controls are more effective at reducing injuries than other approaches, particularly when engineered changes can be introduced without requiring "decision-to-use" by workplaces. Multifaceted approaches combining intervention elements on the organizational level, or across levels, provided moderate to strong effects, in particular when engineering controls were included. Interventions based on firm epidemiologic evidence of causality and a strong conceptual approach were more effective. Effects that are more modest were observed (in short follow-up) for safety climate interventions, using techniques such as feedback or leadership training to improve safety communication. There was limited evidence for a strong effect at medium-term with more intense counseling approaches. Evidence supports regulation/legislation as contributing to the prevention of accidents at work, but with lower effect sizes. Enforcement appears to work more consistently, but with smaller effects. In general, the results were consistent with previous systematic reviews of specific types of safety interventions, although the effectiveness of economic incentives to prevent accidents at work was not consistent with our results, and effectiveness of physiological safety intervention was only consistent to some extent.

LIMITATIONS

Acute musculoskeletal injuries and injuries from more long-time workplace exposures were not always clearly distinguished in research reports. In some studies acute and chronic exposures were mixed, resulting in inevitable misclassification. Of note, the classification of these events also remains problematic in clinical medicine. It was not possible to conduct meta-analyses on all types of interventions (due to variability in approach, context, and participants). The findings presented for most intervention types are from limited sources, and assessment of publication bias was not possible. These issues are not surprising, given the breadth of the field of occupational safety. To incorporate studies using serial measures, which provide the only source of information for some safety interventions such as legislation, we took a systematic, grounded approach to their review. Rather than requiring more stringent, specific criteria for inclusion of ITS studies, we chose to assess how investigators justified their approach to design and analyses, based on the context in which they were working. We sought to identify measures taken to improve external validity of studies, reasonable statistical inference, as well as an overall appropriate inferential process. We found the process useful and enlightening. Given the new approach, we may have failed to extract points others may find relevant. Similarly, to facilitate the broad nature of this review, we used a novel categorization of safety interventions, which is likely to evolve with additional use. The broad scope of this review and the time and resources available did not allow for contacting authors of original papers or seeking translation of non-English manuscripts, resulting in a few cases where we did not have sufficient information that may have been possible to obtain from the authors.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS

Our synthesis of the relative effectiveness of workplace safety interventions is in accordance with the Public Health Hierarchy of Hazard Control. Specifically, more effective interventions eliminate risk at the source of the hazard through engineering solutions or the separation of workers from hazards; effects were greater when these control measures worked independently of worker "decision-to-use" at the worksite. Interventions based on firm epidemiological evidence of causality and clear theoretical bases for the intervention approach were more effective in preventing injuries. Less effective behavioral approaches were often directed at the prevention of all workplace injuries through a common pathway, such as introducing safety training, without explicitly addressing specific hazards. We caution that this does not mean that training does not play an essential function in worker safety, but rather that it is not effective in the absence of other efforts. Due to the potential to reach large groups of workers through regulation and enforcement, these interventions with relatively modest effects, could have large population-based effects.

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.

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.

Do training and needle-safety devices prevent needlestick injuries? A systematised review of the literature

This systematised review was undertaken to appraise research on the effects of training and the use of needle-safety devices (NSDs) on the prevention of needlestick injuries (NSIs) among health workers, focusing on a European perspective. A literature search from 2007 to 2017 was performed, which identified six studies that investigated the introduction of training and NSDs and their affect on NSIs. The six chosen studies identified that training, as well as the adoption of NSDs, has an impact on preventing NSIs. However, further information is required on the content and mode of delivery of training and on which types of NSDs are most effective at preventing injuries. This will help healthcare workers to understand and implement the most effective strategies to prevent injuries. This article provides a critique of the research approaches used in the six studies.

Overcoming public health risks to staff during the management of waste from healthcare facilities

Purpose The management of public health risks is a key focus for the European Union. One of the key factors that has been shown to pose a public health risk is that of the management of needles from healthcare facilities. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach Using audits of two case study hospitals based in northern Italy, this study sought to examine the key factors that resulted in needle stick injuries amongst staff and suggest measures to minimise these risks. Findings The number of needle stick injuries was influenced by various key factors including the time period during the year, the length of time employed, the location within the site, staff category and working hours. Practical implications Suggestions for overcoming the risk factors, including redesigning working patterns, staff training and awareness building, and the use of safety-engineered devices are outlined. Originality/value This study examined the incidence of needle stick injuries amongst healthcare staff in two Italian hospitals, which was lower than in other countries due to various factors, including recapping of needles not being allowed, the introduction of self-retractable needles and awareness campaigns about the correct disposal procedures of potentially infectious waste.

Nosocomial transmission of hepatitis C virus in a liver transplant center in Hong Kong: implication of reusable blood collection tube holder as the vehicle for transmission

BACKGROUND

A liver transplant recipient developed hospital-acquired symptomatic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 6a infection 14 months post transplant.

OBJECTIVE

Standard outbreak investigation.

METHODS

Patient chart review, interviews of patients and staff, observational study of patient care practices, environmental surveillance, blood collection simulation experiments, and phylogenetic study of HCV strains using partial envelope gene sequences (E1-E2) of HCV genotype 6a strains from the suspected source patient, the environment, and the index patient were performed.

RESULTS

Investigations and data review revealed no further cases of HCV genotype 6a infection in the transplant unit. However, a suspected source with a high HCV load was identified. HCV genotype 6a was found in a contaminated reusable blood-collection tube holder with barely visible blood and was identified as the only shared item posing risk of transmission to the index case patient. Also, 14 episodes of sequential blood collection from the source patient and the index case patient were noted on the computerized time log of the laboratory barcoding system during their 13 days of cohospitalization in the liver transplant ward. Disinfection of the tube holders was not performed after use between patients. Blood collection simulation experiments showed that HCV and technetium isotope contaminating the tip of the sleeve capping the sleeved-needle can reflux back from the vacuum-specimen tube side to the patient side.

CONCLUSIONS

A reusable blood-collection tube holder without disinfection between patients can cause a nosocomial HCV infection. Single-use disposable tube holders should be used according to the recommendations by Occupational Safety and Health Administration and World Health Organization.

Do safety engineered devices reduce needlestick injuries?

BACKGROUND

Needlestick injuries (NSIs) are one of the most common health hazards facing healthcare workers (HCWs) across the globe. Needles with safety engineered devices (SEDs) have been developed to minimize the risk of exposure to blood-borne infections, such as hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus and human immunodeficiency virus, associated with NSIs.

AIM

To assess the effect of the introduction of SEDs in preventing NSIs among HCWs at Jeroen Bosch Hospital, the Netherlands.

METHODS

The incidence rates of reported NSIs before and after the introduction of SEDs were compared. All HCWs who reported an NSI with an SED were interviewed in order to understand the underlying causes of the NSIs.

FINDINGS

Despite the introduction of SEDs, the incidence of NSIs increased from 1.9 per 100 HCWs before the introduction of SEDs to 2.2 per 100 HCWs after the introduction of SEDs. The registration of reported SED-related NSIs showed a significant decrease in the number of NSIs related to injection needles and blood sugar needles, while an unexpected significant increase in NSIs with nadroparin calcium needles and infusion needles was found. The most common causes reported for NSIs were unsafe disposal of the needles and problems with the safety feature.

CONCLUSION

The application of SEDs has not led to a reduction in NSIs. The majority of NSIs caused by a needle with an SED can be prevented by stimulation of safe needle disposal, proper use of SEDs, and provision of feedback to manufacturers to keep improving product design.

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.

Clinical, economic, and humanistic burden of needlestick injuries in healthcare workers

Introduction

Needlestick injuries (NSIs) from a contaminated needle put healthcare workers (HCWs) at risk of becoming infected with a blood-borne virus and suffering serious short- and long-term medical consequences. Hypodermic injections using disposable syringes and needles are the most frequent cause of NSIs.

Objective

To perform a systematic literature review on NSI and active safety-engineered devices for hypodermic injection.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and COCHRANE databases were searched for studies that evaluated the clinical, economic, or humanistic outcomes of NSI or active safety-engineered devices.

Results

NSIs have been reported by 14.9%–69.4% of HCWs with the wide range due to differences in countries, settings, and methodologies used to determine rates. Exposure to contaminated sharps is responsible for 37%–39% of the worldwide cases of hepatitis B and C infections in HCWs. HCWs may experience serious emotional effects and mental health disorders after a NSI, resulting in work loss and post-traumatic stress disorder. In 2015 International US$ (IntUS$), the average cost of a NSI was IntUS$747 (range IntUS$199–1,691). Hypodermic injections, the most frequent cause of NSI, are responsible for 32%–36% of NSIs. The use of safety devices that cover the needle-tip after hypodermic injection lowers the risk of NSI per HCW by 43.4%–100% compared to conventional devices. The economic value of converting to safety injective devices shows net savings, favorable budget impact, and overall cost-effectiveness.

Conclusion

The clinical, economic, and humanistic burden is substantial for HCWs who experience a NSI. Safety-engineered devices for hypodermic injection demonstrate value by reducing NSI risk, and the associated direct and indirect costs, psychological stress on HCWs, and occupational blood-borne viral infection risk.

Bloodborne pathogen exposures: Difference in reporting rates and individual predictors among health care personnel

BACKGROUND

Employees in health care settings are at varying risk for bloodborne pathogen (BBP) exposures. We compared differences in reporting rates of BBP exposures among health care personnel during 2 different time periods, assessing job category, years of experience, and sex as potential predictors for exposure.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the employee health department BBP database at 2 time periods (September 1, 2012-April 30, 2013, and September 1, 2013-April 30, 2014) in which 2 different reporting protocols (call center vs pager) was used. A survey was administered to assess reported and unreported exposures within a 12-month period.

RESULTS

BBP exposures were highest among residents and lowest among students. Physicians' reporting rate doubled when the call center was no longer used (relative risk, 2.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-5.52). Percutaneous injuries were the most common (78.3%), and most occurred in the operating room or postanesthesia unit (30.8%) and patient rooms (28.9%). Of 1,105 survey respondents, 103 (9.3%) recalled some type of exposure, but only 80 (77.7%) reported these exposures. When accounting for years of experience and sex, job category was significantly associated with injury or exposure within the previous 12 months (P < .001). Risk of exposure among residents was 3 times higher (odds ratio, 3.10; 95 CI, 1.60-6.00) than nurses.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk and reporting behaviors of BBP exposures vary widely across different providers. Training and education to prevent BBP exposures may need to be tailored toward different provider types.

Causes of needlestick injuries in three healthcare settings: analysis of accident notifications registered six months after the implementation of EU Directive 2010/32/EU in Germany

BACKGROUND

Needlestick injuries (NSIs) are the most common cause of sharps injuries and pose a serious risk to healthcare workers (HCWs). In 2014, 'Technical rule for biological agents in healthcare and welfare facilities' (TRBA 250) was modified in Germany in order to promote the prevention of sharps injuries.

AIMS

To examine the epidemiology of NSIs among HCWs in hospitals, doctor's offices and in- and outpatient care; to collect information on the causes of the accidents when safety-engineered devices (SEDs) are used; and to compare the results with the main principles of TRBA 250.

METHODS

The survey was based on HCWs' compensation claims for NSIs, as notified within a four-week period in November 2014. Detailed information on the NSI was collected by telephone interview.

FINDINGS

In total, 533 HCWs participated. Subcutaneous needles were most often involved in NSIs, regardless of the healthcare setting (39% of all NSIs). Insulin pens were involved in 48% of NSIs in in- and outpatient care. Disposal of sharps devices accounted for 38% of the injuries. SEDs were used in 20% of NSIs. Lack of activation was the most important cause of failure when SEDs were used.

CONCLUSION

Despite the binding recommendations of TRBA 250, more efforts are needed to increase the experience of HCWs in terms of working with SEDs. All professional groups must be encouraged to be more aware of the risks associated with sharps disposal. Safe handling practices for disposal of insulin pens are needed in in- and outpatient care settings.

Hospital housekeepers: Victims of ineffective hospital waste management

Improper waste management exposes hospital housekeepers to biological risk. The objectives of this study were to identify the frequency and profile of exposure incidents, classify the role of sharps waste, and compare the first and last occurrences for hospital housekeepers with multiple exposure incidents. A retrospective epidemiological study using Brazilian records from 1989 to 2012 was conducted. Data analyzed included hospital treatment records and the state notification database. Probabilistic linkage was performed using LinkPlus and data analysis using SPSS. There were 996 (11.6%) injuries, with 57 (6.1%) workers reporting multiple occurrences, for a total of 938 workers. These were primarily needlestick injuries (98.5%), involving blood (85.6%), caused by hypodermic needles (75.1%), and improper sharps disposal (70.8%). The number of workers completing vaccination after their first injury and before their last injury was statistically significant. Additional efforts to prevent and manage exposure incidents are needed.

Use of safety-engineered devices by healthcare workers for intravenous and/or phlebotomy procedures in healthcare settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The acquisition of needle-stick injuries (NSI) in a healthcare setting poses an occupational hazard of transmitting blood-borne pathogens from patients to healthcare workers (HCWs). The objective of this study was to systematically review the evidence about the efficacy and safety of using safety-engineered intravenous devices and safety-engineered phlebotomy devices by HCWs.

METHODS

We included randomized and non-randomized studies comparing safety-engineered devices to conventional/standard devices that lack safety features for delivering intravenous injections and/or for blood-withdrawal procedures (phlebotomy). The outcomes of interest included NSI rates, and blood-borne infections rates among HCWs and patients. We conducted an extensive literature search strategy using the OVID interface in October 2013. We followed the standard methods for study selection and data abstraction. When possible, we conducted meta-analyses using a random-effects model. We used the GRADE methodology to assess the quality of evidence by outcome.

RESULTS

We identified twenty-two eligible studies: Twelve assessed safety-engineered devices for intravenous procedures, five for phlebotomy procedures, and five for both. Twenty-one of those studies were observational while one was a randomized trial. All studies assessed the reduction in NSIs among HCWs. For safety-engineered intravenous devices, the pooled relative risk for NSI per HCW was 0.28 [0.13, 0.59] (moderate quality evidence). The pooled relative risk for NSI per device used or procedure performed was 0.34 [0.08,1.49] (low quality evidence). For safety-engineered phlebotomy devices, the pooled relative risk for NSI per HCW was 0.57 [0.38, 0.84] (moderate quality evidence). The pooled relative risk for NSI per device used or procedure performed was 0.53 [0.43,0.65] (moderate quality evidence). We identified no studies assessing the outcome of blood-borne infections among healthcare workers or patients.

CONCLUSION

There is moderate-quality evidence that the use of safety-engineered devices in intravenous injections and infusions, and phlebotomy (blood-drawing) procedures reduces NSI rates of HCWs.

Safety engineered injection devices for intramuscular, subcutaneous and intradermal injections in healthcare delivery settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Occupational sharps injuries are associated with transmission of bloodborne viruses to healthcare workers, including hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Similarly reuse of syringes in healthcare settings might transmit these infections between patients. The objective of this study was to systematically review the evidence about the effects of the use by health care workers of two types of safety engineered injection devices, when delivering intramuscular, subcutaneous, or intradermal injectable medications: sharps injury protection syringes and reuse prevention syringes.

METHODS

We included both randomized and non-randomized studies comparing safety syringes to syringes without safety features. Outcomes of interest included needlestick injuries, and HIV, HBV and HCV infections amongst HCWs (for sharps injury prevention syringes) and patients (for reuse prevention syringes). When possible, we conducted meta-analyses using a random-effects model. We tested results for heterogeneity across studies using the I statistic. We assessed the quality of evidence by outcome using the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

We included nine eligible studies: six assessed devices that qualify as sharps injury prevention devices, and three assessed devices that qualify as both injury prevention devices and reuse prevention devices. Eight studies were observational while one was randomized. All studies assessed a single outcome: needle stick injuries among healthcare workers. For sharp injury prevention syringes, the meta-analysis of five studies resulted in a pooled relative risk of 0.54 [0.41, 0.71] for the effect on needlestick injuries per healthcare worker. The associated quality of evidence was rated as moderate. For reuse prevention syringes, data from one study provided a relative risk of 0.40 [0.27, 0.59] for the effect on needlestick injuries per healthcare worker. The associated quality of evidence was rated as moderate. We identified no studies reporting on the effect on the reuse of syringes.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified moderate quality evidence that syringes with sharps injury prevention feature reduce the incidence of needlestick injuries per healthcare worker. We identified no studies reporting data for the remaining outcomes of interest for HCWs. Similarly we identified no studies reporting on the effect of syringes with a reuse prevention feature on the reuse of syringes or on the other outcomes of interest for patients.

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

BACKGROUND

Quantitative information on the effectiveness of safety-engineered devices (SEDs) is needed to support decisions regarding their implementation.

AIM

To elucidate the effects of SED use in winged steel needles, intravenous (IV) catheter stylets and suture needles on needlestick injury (NSI) incidence rates in Japan.

METHODS

Japan EPINet survey data and device utilization data for conventional devices and SEDs were collected from 26 participating hospitals between 1 April 2009 and 31 March 2014. The NSI incidence rate for every 100,000 devices was calculated according to hospital, year and SED use for winged steel needles, IV catheter stylets and suture needles. Weighted means and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to calculate overall NSI incidence rates.

FINDINGS

In total, there were 236 NSIs for winged steel needles, 152 NSIs for IV catheter stylets and 180 NSIs for suture needles. The weighted NSI incidence rates per 100,000 devices for SEDs and non-SEDs were as follows: winged steel needles, 2.10 (95% CI 1.66-2.54) and 14.95 (95% CI 2.46-27.43), respectively; IV catheter stylets, 0.95 (95% CI 0.60-1.29) and 6.39 (95% CI 3.56-9.23), respectively; and suture needles, 1.47 (95% CI -1.14-4.09) and 16.50 (95% CI 4.15-28.86), respectively. All devices showed a significant reduction in the NSI incidence rate with SED use (P < 0.001 for winged steel needles, P = 0.035 for IV catheter stylets and P = 0.044 for suture needles).

CONCLUSION

SED use substantially reduces the incidence of NSIs, and is therefore recommended as a means to prevent occupational infections in healthcare workers and improve healthcare safety.

Prevention of needle-stick injuries in healthcare facilities: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE To estimate the summary effectiveness of different needle-stick injury (NSI)-prevention interventions. DESIGN We conducted a meta-analysis of English-language articles evaluating methods for reducing needle stick, sharp, or percutaneous injuries published from 2002 to 2012 identified using PubMed and Medline EBSCO databases. Data were extracted using a standardized instrument. Random effects models were used to estimate the summary effectiveness of 3 interventions: training alone, safety-engineered devices (SEDs) alone, and the combination of training and SEDs. SETTING Healthcare facilities, mainly hospitals PARTICIPANTS Healthcare workers including physicians, midwives, and nurses RESULTS From an initial pool of 250 potentially relevant studies, 17 studies met our inclusion criteria. Six eligible studies evaluated the effectiveness of training interventions, and the summary effect of the training intervention was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.50-0.89). The summary effect across the 5 studies that assessed the efficacy of SEDs was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.40-0.64). A total of 8 studies evaluated the effectiveness of training plus SEDs, with a summary effect of 0.38 (95% CI, 0.28-0.50). CONCLUSION Training combined with SEDs can substantially reduce the risk of NSIs.

The serious and ongoing issue of needlestick in Australian healthcare settings

Australian healthcare workers and especially nurses repeatedly have their safety and health jeopardized through occupational exposures to blood and body fluids. Percutaneous or needlestick injuries are especially concerning and consistent. The purpose of this article is to again draw attention to the serious and costly issue of needlestick injuries in Australian healthcare settings. Specifically it considers the context of needlestick injuries and safety engineered devices within Standard 3 of the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care's National Standards reform agenda. Given that Standard 3 alone will likely be insufficient to reduce needlestick injuries, this article also discusses improvements and current challenges in international needlestick injury reduction in an attempt to stimulate key opinion leader consideration of Australia adopting similar strategies.

Sharps Injuries among Employees of Acute Care Hospitals in Massachusetts, 2002–2007

Objective.

Sharps with engineered sharps injury protections (SESIPs) have been found to reduce risk of sharps injuries (Sis). We examined trends in SI rates among employees of acute care hospitals in Massachusetts, including the impact of SESIPs on SI trends during 2002-2007.

Design.

Prospective surveillance.

Setting.

Seventy-six acute care hospitals licensed by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health.

Participants.

Employees of acute care hospitals who reported Sis to their employers.

Methods.

Data on Sis in acute care hospitals collected by the Massachusetts Sharps Injury Surveillance System were used to examine trends in SI rates over time by occupation, hospital size, and device. Negative binomial regression was used to assess trends.

Results.

During 2002-2007, 16,158 Sis among employees of 76 acute care hospitals were reported to the surveillance system. The annual SI rate decreased by 22%, with an annual decline of 4.7% (P< .001). Rates declined significantly among nurses (—7.2% per year;P< .001) but not among physicians (—0.9% per year;P= .553). SI rates associated with winged steel needles and hypodermic needles and syringes also declined significantly as the proportion of injuries involving devices with sharps injury prevention features increased during the same time period.

Conclusion.

SI rates involving devices for which SESIPs are widely available and appear to be increasingly used have declined. The continued use of devices lacking SI protections for which SESIPs are available needs to be addressed. The extent to which injuries involving SESIPs are due to flaws in design or lack of experience and training must be examined.

Biological risk among hospital housekeepers

Although not directly responsible for patient care, hospital housekeepers are still susceptible to accidents with biological material. The objectives of this study were to establish profile and frequency of accidents among hospital housekeepers, describe behaviors pre- and postaccident, and risk factors. This was a cross-sectional study with hospital housekeepers in Goiania, Brazil. Data were obtained from interviews and vaccination records. The observations were as follows: (1) participating workers: 94.3%; (2) incomplete hepatitis B vaccination: 1 in 3; and (3) accident rate: 26.5%, mostly percutaneous with hypodermic needles, and involved blood from an unknown source; roughly half occurred during waste management. Upon review, length of service less than 5 years, completed hepatitis B vaccination, and had been tested for anti-HBs (hepatitis B surface antigen) influenced frequency of accidents. These findings suggest that improper disposal of waste appears to enhance the risk to hospital housekeepers. All hospital workers should receive continued training with regard to waste management.

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

BACKGROUND

Needlestick 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 January 2014) and LILACS (until January 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two 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 four RCTs with 1136 participants, two cluster-RCTs with 795 participants and 73,454 patient days, four CBAs with approximately 22,000 participants and seven ITS with an average of seven data points. These studies evaluated safe modifications of blood collection systems, intravenous (IV) systems, injection systems, multiple devices and sharps containers. The needlestick injury (NSI) rate in the control groups was estimated at about one to five NSIs per 1000 person-years. There was only one study from a low- or middle-income country. The risk of bias was high in most studies.In one ITS study that evaluated safe blood collection systems, NSIs decreased immediately after the introduction (effect size (ES) -6.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) -9.5 to -4.2) and there was no clear evidence of an additional benefit over time (ES -1.2, 95% CI -2.5 to 0.1). Another ITS study used an outdated recapping shield.There was very low quality evidence that NSIs were reduced with the introduction of safe IV devices in two out of four studies but the other two studies showed no clear evidence of a trend towards a reduction. However, there was moderate quality evidence in four other studies that these devices increased the number of blood splashes where the safety system had to be engaged actively (relative risk (RR) 1.6, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.36).There was no clear evidence that the introduction of safe injection devices changed the NSI rate in two studies.The introduction of multiple safety devices showed a decrease in NSI in one study but not in another. The introduction of safety containers showed a decrease in NSI in one study but inconsistent results in two other studies.There was no evidence in the included studies about which type of device was better, for example shielding or retraction of the needle.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For safe blood collection systems, we found very low quality evidence in one study that these decrease needlestick injuries (NSIs). For intravenous systems, we found very low quality evidence that they result in a decrease of NSI compared with usual devices but moderate quality evidence that they increase contamination with blood. For other 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. All studies had a considerable risk of bias and the lack of evidence of a beneficial effect could be due both to confounding and bias. This does not mean that these devices are not effective.Cluster-randomised controlled studies are needed to compare the various types of safety engineered devices for their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, especially in low- and middle-income countries.

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.

epic3: national evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections in NHS hospitals in England

National evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections (HCAI) in National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England were originally commissioned by the Department of Health and developed during 1998-2000 by a nurse-led multi-professional team of researchers and specialist clinicians. Following extensive consultation, they were first published in January 2001(1) and updated in 2007.(2) A cardinal feature of evidence-based guidelines is that they are subject to timely review in order that new research evidence and technological advances can be identified, appraised and, if shown to be effective for the prevention of HCAI, incorporated into amended guidelines. Periodically updating the evidence base and guideline recommendations is essential in order to maintain their validity and authority. The Department of Health commissioned a review of new evidence and we have updated the evidence base for making infection prevention and control recommendations. A critical assessment of the updated evidence indicated that the epic2 guidelines published in 2007 remain robust, relevant and appropriate, but some guideline recommendations required adjustments to enhance clarity and a number of new recommendations were required. These have been clearly identified in the text. In addition, the synopses of evidence underpinning the guideline recommendations have been updated. These guidelines (epic3) provide comprehensive recommendations for preventing HCAI in hospital and other acute care settings based on the best currently available evidence. National evidence-based guidelines are broad principles of best practice that need to be integrated into local practice guidelines and audited to reduce variation in practice and maintain patient safety. Clinically effective infection prevention and control practice is an essential feature of patient protection. By incorporating these guidelines into routine daily clinical practice, patient safety can be enhanced and the risk of patients acquiring an infection during episodes of health care in NHS hospitals in England can be minimised.

Occupational exposure to blood-borne pathogens in a tertiary hospital: benchmarking using patient days

Incidence and risk factors for occupational exposure to blood-borne pathogens (OEBBPs) in a tertiary hospital in Saudi Arabia was assessed. Reported sharps injuries from 2009 to 2010 were analyzed and benchmarked using patient days. OEBBPs caused by sharps injuries increased from 41 in 2009 to 65 in 2010, with an incidence rate of 4.09/10 000 patient days in 2009 and 5.9/10 000 patient days in 2010. Most episodes (41%) occurred during recapping of hollow bore needles after obtaining blood specimens. The highest incidence was among nursing staff(n/N = 87/106; 82%), and injuries also occurred in housekeeping staff (3.7%). A correlationbetween morning shift and OEBBPs was observed, and the highest number of episodes occurred in the emergency room (21.5%) and renal dialysis unit (16.9%). There was exposure to HCV (n = 13) and HBV (n = 4) but not to HIV (n = 0), and no seroconversions were documented. Education on adherence to universal precaution measures and use of safety engineered devices as well as the introduction of an OEBBP notification hotline are recommended.

Subcutaneous injections: preventing needlestick injuries in the community

Community nurses provide care to patients in a variety of settings, for example health centres, community hospitals, patients' homes, residential and nursing homes. Administering subcutaneous injections to patients in the community is an everyday activity for many nurses in clinical practice. Many problems related to being 'sharps safe' are common to both community nurses and hospital staff. The majority of subcutaneous injections administered in the community are for patients with diabetes. Reducing needlestick injuries after the administration of subcutaneous injections in the community remains paramount to all NHS staff. This article provides information on what national standards to employ when administrating subcutaneous injections and what safety practices should be undertaken for good sharps management. Staff administering subcutaneous injections in the community need to ensure that they are updated on the latest developments in safety needle devices in order to prevent needlestick injuries and provide safe, effective and individualised care for their patients.

Conventional and sharp safety devices in 6 hospitals in British Columbia, Canada

BACKGROUND

Reengineered sharp safety devices have been recommended to reduce occupational percutaneous injury risk in health care facilities. We conducted this study just over 1 year after passage of legislation requiring the use of sharp safety medical devices to assess the frequency of safety and conventional sharp device use and whether safety features were being activated to cover sharp points after safety devices were used and before disposal.

METHODS

Approximately equal numbers of sharps disposal containers from various wards in 6 nonprofit adult and pediatric British Columbia hospitals were audited by paired research assistants, wearing protective clothing.

RESULTS

In the 699 audited sharps containers, 7% (1,690/25,910) of all devices were conventional devices, specifically 2% (96/4,702) of all phlebotomy devices, 7% (1,240/17,705) of all syringes, and 10% (354/3,503) of all intravenous catheters. In addition, 94% (4,344/4,602) of all safety phlebotomy devices, 95% (2,955/3,119) of all safety intravenous devices, and 80% (13,050/16,420) of all safety syringes had been activated before disposal.

CONCLUSION

More than 1 year after legislation was passed mandating the use of sharp safety devices in British Columbia hospitals, the risk from sharps remains excessive because of the ongoing use of conventional sharp devices and nonactivation of safety devices.

Safety syringes and anti-needlestick devices in orthopaedic surgery

BACKGROUND

The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery (AAOS), The Joint Commission, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act encourage the integration of safety-engineered devices to prevent needlestick injuries to health-care workers and patients. We hypothesized that safety syringes and needles could be used in outpatient orthopaedic injection and aspiration procedures.

METHODS

The study investigated the orthopaedic uses and procedural idiosyncrasies of safety-engineered devices, including (1) four safety needles (Eclipse, SafetyGlide, SurGuard, and Magellan), (2) a mechanical safety syringe (RPD), (3) two automatic retractable syringes (Integra, VanishPoint), (4) three manual retractable syringes (Procedur-SF, Baksnap, Invirosnap), and (5) three shielded syringes (Safety-Lok, Monoject, and Digitally Activated Shielded [DAS] Syringe). The devices were first tested ex vivo, and then 1300 devices were used for 425 subjects undergoing outpatient arthrocentesis, intra-articular injections, local anesthesia, aspiration biopsy, and ultrasound-guided procedures.

RESULTS

During the clinical observation, there were no accidental needlesticks (0 needlesticks per 1300 devices). Safety needles could be successfully used on a Luer syringe but were limited to ≤1.5 in (≤3.81 cm) in length and the shield could interfere with sonography. The mechanical safety syringes functioned well in all orthopaedic procedures. Automatic retractable syringes were too small for arthrocentesis of the knee, and the plunger blew out and prematurely collapsed with high-pressure injections. The manual retractable syringes and shielded syringes could be used with conventional needles for most orthopaedic procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

The most effective and reliable safety devices for orthopaedic syringe procedures are shielded safety needles, mechanical syringes, manual retractable syringes, and shielded syringes, but not automatic retractable syringes. Even when adopting safety-engineered devices for an orthopaedic clinic, conventional syringes larger than 20 mL and conventional needles longer than 1.5 in (3.8 cm) are necessary.

Blood-borne viruses in health care workers: prevention and management

Three pathogens account for most cases of occupationally acquired blood-borne infection: hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The highest proportion of occupational transmission is due to percutaneous injury (PI) via hollow-bore needles with vascular access. We briefly review prevention and management of blood-borne pathogens in health care workers (HCWs) in developed countries. HCW compliance with standard precautions is necessary for prevention of PI. Safety-engineered devices are now being increasingly promoted as an approach to decreasing the rate of PI. Prevention of HBV transmission requires HCW immunization through vaccination against HBV. In non-vaccinated HCWs (or HCWs with an unknown antibody response to vaccination) exposed to an HbsAg-positive or an untested source patient, post-exposure prophylaxis with HBV vaccine, hepatitis B immunoglobulin or both must be started as soon as possible. Although no available prophylaxis exists for HCV, it is crucial to identify HCV exposure and infection in health care settings and to consequently propose early treatment when transmission occurs. Following occupational exposure with potential for HIV transmission, use of antiretroviral post-exposure prophylaxis must be evaluated. Patients need to be protected from blood-borne pathogen-infected HCWs, and especially surgeons performing exposure-prone procedures (EPPs) with risk of transmission to the patient. However, HCWs not performing EPPs should be protected from arbitrary administrative decisions that would restrict their practice rights. Finally, it must be emphasized that occupational blood exposure is of great concern in developing countries, with higher risk of exposure to blood-borne viruses because of a higher prevalence of the latter than in developed countries, re-use of needles and syringes and greater risk of sustaining PI, since injection routes are more frequently used for drug administration than in developed countries.

Ongoing use of conventional devices and safety device activation rates in hospitals in Ontario, Canada

This study assessed voluntary compliance with the use of sharp safety devices in lieu of conventional ones and the activation status of these safety devices: VanishPoint syringes, Terumo Surshield butterflies, and Insyte Autoguard IV catheters. Sharps disposal containers from various wards in three private, not-for profit, university-affiliated Ontario hospitals were audited during 9 days in August 2007. In the 149 audited sharps containers, 55% of all syringes found were conventional compared with 45% that were safety syringes. In the three hospitals, the percentages of conventional (non-safety) vs. safety syringes found in used sharps containers were as follows, respectively: (i) 72% conventional and 28% safety, (ii) 55% conventional and 45% safety, and (iii) 65% conventional and 35% safety. In addition, it was found that 77% of 2131 Terumo butterflies, 97% of 1117 Insyte Autoguard IV catheters, and 87% of 4897 VanishPoint syringes in the containers had been activated. This study, carried out approximately 1 year before it was legally required to use safety instead of sharp conventional devices, found that most devices in use were conventional ones. It was also found that only the activation rate for the safety IV device was acceptable.

Provision and use of safety-engineered medical devices among home care and hospice nurses in North Carolina

BACKGROUND

Nurses who provide care in the home are at risk of blood exposure from needlesticks. Using safety-engineered medical devices reduces the risk of needlestick. The objectives of this study were to assess provision of safety devices by home care and hospice agencies as well as the use of these devices by home care and hospice nurses in North Carolina, and to examine the association between provision and use.

METHODS

A mail survey was conducted among North Carolina home care and hospice nurses in 2006.

RESULTS

The adjusted response rate was 69% (n = 833). The percentage of nurses who were always provided with safety devices ranged from 51% (blood tube holders) to 83% (winged steel needles). Ninety-five percent of nurses who were always provided with safety devices, but only 15%-50% of nurses who were not always provided with safety devices, used a safety device the last time they used that general type of device. Among nurses who did not use a safety device on that occasion, 60%-80% did not use it because it was not provided by the agency.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that limited access is the primary reason for home care/hospice nurses' failure to use safety devices. The policy goal of providing safety devices to health care workers in all situations in which such devices could reduce their risk of needlestick is not being achieved for home care nurses in North Carolina.

Management practices and risk of occupational blood exposure in U.S. paramedics: Needlesticks

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to present risk estimates for needlestick in U.S. paramedics and estimated risk ratios for selected management practices.

METHODS

A mail survey was conducted among a national sample of U.S. paramedics in 2002-2003.

RESULTS

The adjusted response rate was 55% (n = 2,664). The overall 12-month risk of needlestick was 6.7% (95% confidence interval, 5.4-7.9). Risk ratios for provision of safety-engineered medical devices and two supervisory behaviors that emphasized safe work practices ranged from 2.5 to 3.2. The protective effect of working in an environment that included both of the supervisory behaviors was greater than the protective effect of always being provided with safety devices. A sensitivity analysis indicated that the risk ratio estimates were unlikely to be inflated by nonresponse bias.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that greater provision of safety devices and interventions aimed at management practices that promote worker safety could substantially reduce the risk of needlestick among U.S. paramedics.

Weaning mechanical ventilation after off-pump coronary artery bypass graft procedures directed by noninvasive gas measurements

OBJECTIVE(S)

Partial pressure of carbon dioxide and oxygen were transcutaneously measured in adults after off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) surgery. The clinical use of such measurements and interchangeability with arterial blood gas measurements for weaning patients from postoperative mechanical ventilation were assessed.

DESIGN

This was a prospective observational study.

SETTING

Tertiary referral heart hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Postoperative OPCAB surgical patients.

INTERVENTIONS

Transcutaneous oxygen and carbon dioxide measurements.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

In this prospective observational study, 32 consecutive adult patients in a tertiary care medical center underwent OPCAB surgery. Noninvasive measurement of respiratory gases was performed during the postoperative period and compared with arterial blood gases. The investigator was blinded to the reports of arterial blood gas studies and weaned patients using a "weaning protocol" based on transcutaneous gas measurement. The number of patients successfully weaned based on transcutaneous measurements and the number of times the weaning process was held up were noted. A total of 212 samples (pairs of arterial and transcutaneous values of oxygen and carbon dioxide) were obtained from 32 patients. Bland-Altman plots and mountain plots were used to analyze the interchangeability of the data. Twenty-five (79%) of the patients were weaned from the ventilator based on transcutaneous gas measurements alone. Transcutaneous carbon dioxide measurements were found to be interchangeable with arterial carbon dioxide during 96% of measurements, versus 79% for oxygen measurements.

CONCLUSION

More than three fourths of the patients were weaned from mechanical ventilation and extubated based on transcutaneous gas values alone after OPCAB surgery. The noninvasive transcutaneous carbon dioxide measurement can be used as a surrogate for arterial carbon dioxide measurement to manage postoperative OPCAB patients.

Educational programmes and sharps injuries in health care workers

BACKGROUND

Sharps injuries in health care personnel still represent a significant problem worldwide. Many studies show a reduction in sharps injuries following the introduction and use of different protection devices, but few studies focus on the role of training programmes in the prevention of such injuries.

AIMS

To analyse the influence of training programmes on sharps injuries in health care workers (HCW).

METHODS

The study was carried out in a 350-bed university hospital in north-eastern Italy with 700 HCW. Training courses on biological risk for physicians, nurses, ancillary operators and laboratory technicians have been in place since 1998. Data on all sharps injuries reported by HCW between 1998 and 2006 were analysed together with information on HCW who attended the training courses.

RESULTS

Between 1998 and 2006, there was a reduction in the incidence of sharps injuries from 11 to 4% (P < 0.01). During the same period, the number of trained HCW increased from 26 to 69% (P < 0.01). Trained personnel had a statistically significant lower relative risk (RR) for injury with RR = 0.06 (95% CI 0.02-0.18).

CONCLUSIONS

A continuous educational effort for HCW leads to a reduction of sharps injuries.

[Waste management in hospitals. Current situation in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia]

In 20 hospitals in North Rhine-Westphalia in-plant handling wastes and the delivery of the waste to the disposer were examined. Deficits were seen regarding risk assessment and operating instructions, support by company doctors, personal protection equipment, and break areas for the waste collecting personnel. Also the qualification of the waste management officer and his/her time contingent, correct declaration of the wastes, the training of the waste collecting personnel, the cleaning of multi-use containers and transportation vehicles, storage of the wastes at the collecting points, and the use of sharp collecting boxes were to be partly criticized. Consequences and recommendations are given, concerning the company's obligations (e.g., provide risk assessment, operating instructions), waste management officer (e.g., qualification, enough time contingent, regular inspections), waste collecting personnel (e.g., training courses), industrial safety (e.g., protection equipment, break area wash places), company doctors, transportation vehicles in the house (e.g., regular cleaning), one-way collectors (e.g., labelling at the site of the collection), multi-use collectors (e.g., cleaning), and compressing containers (e.g., larger maintenance openings).

Circumstances surrounding occupational blood exposure events in the National Study to Prevent Blood Exposure in Paramedics

More than 20% of U.S. paramedics are exposed to blood each year. Little is known about the circumstances that lead to these exposures. The objective of this study was to describe blood exposure events among U.S. paramedics. A mail survey was conducted in 2002-2003 among a nationally representative sample of licensed paramedics. Eighty percent of needle/lancet sticks involved non-safety devices. A third of mucous membrane exposures occurred even though the paramedic was wearing eye or face protection; in half of the events, the exposures were caused by the patient vomiting, spitting, or coughing up blood; in a third of the events, the patient was being uncooperative or combative. In 83% of the non-intact skin exposures, the paramedic was wearing disposable gloves; the non-intact skin was covered before the call in a third of the events, but the cover did not prevent exposure; 40% of the events occurred when the patient was being uncooperative or combative. These results suggest that blood exposure among paramedics could be reduced through increased use of safety devices and personal protective equipment, improved engineering and design, and increased compliance with Universal Precautions, and that paramedics need techniques for avoiding blood exposure while treating uncooperative or combative patients.

Eliminating the blood: ongoing outbreaks of hepatitis B virus infection and the need for innovative glucose monitoring technologies

BACKGROUND

As part of routine diabetes care, capillary blood is typically sampled using a finger-stick device and then tested using a handheld blood glucose meter. In settings where multiple persons require assistance with blood glucose monitoring, opportunities for bloodborne pathogen transmission may exist.

METHODS

Reports of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection outbreaks in the United States that have been attributed to blood glucose monitoring practices were reviewed and summarized.

RESULTS

Since 1990, state and local health departments investigated 18 HBV infection outbreaks, 15 (83%) in the past 10 years, that were associated with the improper use of blood glucose monitoring equipment. At least 147 persons acquired HBV infection during these outbreaks, 6 (4.1%) of whom died from complications of acute HBV infection. Outbreaks appear to have become more frequent in the past decade, primarily affecting long-term care residents with diabetes. Each outbreak was attributed to glucose monitoring practices that exposed HBV-susceptible persons to blood-contaminated equipment that was previously used on HBV-infected persons. The predominant unsafe practices were the use of spring-loaded finger-stick devices on multiple persons and the sharing of blood glucose testing meters without cleaning and disinfection between uses.

CONCLUSION

Hepatitis B virus infection outbreaks associated with blood glucose monitoring have occurred with increasing regularity in the Unites States and may represent a growing but under-recognized problem. Advances in technology, such as the development of blood glucose testing meters that can withstand frequent disinfection and noninvasive glucose monitoring methods, will likely prove useful in improving patient safety.