Procedure‐Specific Rates for Needlestick Injuries in Health Care Workers

Sharps injuries in the operating room

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to identify who sustains needlestick and sharps injuries, under what circumstances and what actions are taken to minimize the risk and in response to intraoperative NSSIs.

METHODS

The cross-sectional study was conducted in 2013 on 215 operation room personnel in 14 hospitals of the Hormozgan province, Iran.

RESULTS

Two hundred and fifty appropriate responders completed the questionnaire (86 %). Anaesthesia 59 (27.4 %) and operation room technicians 55 (25.6 %) sustained the greatest numbers of NSSIs over the past year. Awareness of local protocols was significantly worse in the residents group. The commonest reasons for noncompliance with NSSIs local protocols were not sure of the local protocols 44 (20.4 %) and prolonged operation so unable to leave operation table 37 (17.3 %).

CONCLUSIONS

A revision of the local protocol to reduce the time it takes to complete may improve compliance. Education is of paramount importance in making health care workers aware of this issue. The application of safety devices led to a reduction in NSSIs and reduces the risk of blood borne infection as well.

Barriers to the reporting and management of needlestick injuries among surgeons

OBJECTIVE

Needlestick injuries are common within surgical practice and carry the risk of transmission of blood borne viruses. Key to reducing this risk is an accessible system of reporting and involvement of occupational health services. We aimed to identify surgeons' attitude and experience dealing with such injuries and identify why in many cases needlestick injuries go unreported.

METHODS

70 questionnaires were hand delivered to surgeons and trainees across 3 UK hospitals and a variety of surgical specialties. The number of injuries and reporting practice was identified. Surgeons were asked to identify from a list the reasons why they did not report their injuries and record importance on a 5-point scale (0-4).

RESULTS

52 surgeons and trainees replied (75%). 42 (81%) had suffered at least 1 needlestick injury with 4 (8%) reporting more than 20. 8 (19%) had reported all their injuries to occupational health with no significant difference in reporting between consultants and trainees (P = 0.2). 12 (23%) felt that reporting of injuries helped to reduce transmission rates. 18 (35%) said that a needlestick had caused them moderate or significant anxiety. The top reasons for not reporting were (0-4). (1) Process too time consuming (2.7), (2) transmission risk very low (2.6), (3) do not want to disrupt operating list (2.0), (4) post exposure prophylaxis ineffective (1.3).

CONCLUSIONS

Most surgeons and trainees do not report all their needlestick injuries to occupational health despite many reporting injury related anxiety. The process is felt to take too long and the perceived risk of viral transmission is low.