Knowledge and awareness regarding occupational needle stick and sharp injuries among dental personnel in Malaysia

Hepatitis B in Healthcare Personnel: An Update on the Global Landscape

Despite the outstanding progress that has been made in the prevention, detection, and management of hepatitis B during the past decades, hepatitis B remains a problem among healthcare personnel (HCP) in many countries. We reviewed studies on all aspects of hepatitis B in HCP published from 2017 through April 2023. They revealed wide variations on the prevalence of infection among HCP, ranging from 0.6% in Europe to >8.7% in Africa, almost always in association with very low vaccination rates. Many studies found a significant association between HCP's knowledge about hepatitis B and hepatitis B vaccines, their vaccination status, and practices. This research also discloses global inequities regarding vaccination policies against hepatitis B, free-of-charge vaccinations, and access to post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP). Strategies to prevent and manage accidental exposures are needed in order to reduce the burden of hepatitis B on HCP, while written policies for all aspects of infection prevention, protective equipment, and PEP should be available. Lastly, HCP should be accordingly educated. These are all imperative given the decline of routine vaccinations in the COVID-19 era, particularly in countries with fragile vaccination programs, and the disruptions of interventions for hepatitis B that are expected to provide a pool of virus transmission to future generations.

Needlestick injuries in dentistry: Time to revisit

BACKGROUND

Blood-borne pathogens (BBPs) are infectious microorganisms that are found in human blood and can cause diseases in humans. Health care workers such as physicians, surgeons, nurses, dentists, dental students, dental assistants, laboratory technicians, personnel handling infectious waste, and other health care employees are at increased risk of exposure to these pathogens. Percutaneous injuries from needles or other sharp objects are the major sources of BBPs in the workplace. Needlestick injuries (NSIs) have the most potential to transmit and have the easiest mode of transmission of BBPs.

TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED

The authors searched electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scopus, Embase, MEDLINE-Ovid) for studies and articles focused on the various aspects of NSIs, their possible causes, prevention, and management protocols.

RESULTS

There is a lack of literature on the global prevalence of NSIs among dental practitioners and underreporting of NSIs by clinicians. The authors also found that dental students and inexperienced practitioners were the most vulnerable. They found apparent inconsistencies in guidelines and recommendations from various regulatory and statutory agencies in charge of limiting and managing NSIs.

CONCLUSION

The most significant occupational risks for health care workers globally are NSIs. Dentists are recognized as one of the high-risk groups for exposure to NSIs. Although the reporting rate was noticeably low, the frequency of NSIs among dental students was alarmingly high.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Appropriate and succinct training of dental health care workers is crucial for prevention and management of NSIs. It is recommended that dentists familiarize themselves with recommendations from such agencies and organizations as the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and American Dental Association.

The global incidence and associated factors of surgical gloves perforation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgeon's hands are exposed to a range of chemical and physical stressors that influence the integrity of gloves. Thus, glove perforation facilitates pathogen transmission through the holes. Numerous studies have shown that glove perforation is of great importance, but there is still no complete consensus.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the safety conditions of surgical gloves based on the incidence of glove perforation among surgical teams.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted by searching PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ISI, and ProQuest databases. The incidence of glove perforation was reviewed in eight categories. A total of 580 articles were found in the initial search.

RESULTS

109 articles containing 130 datasets were analyzed. The overall incidence of glove perforation was 14.44 %. Surgeons had the highest incidence of glove perforation (23.09 %). An increase in the duration of surgery increased the odds of perforation. It was found that 68.58% of the glove perforations were not identified by practitioners.

CONCLUSION

Despite major advances in the design of surgical gloves, the issue of safety and integrity of gloves has not improved. Due to the high incidence of surgical glove perforations, most of which had not been identified, it is imperative to consider strategies to minimize the incidence of perforation. The results of the present study can be used to integrate information related to the rate of perforation of surgical gloves in different surgeries.

Comprehensive Knowledge and Preparedness among Dental Community to Confront COVID-19-A Multicentric Cross-Sectional Study

The healthcare policy changes need to be updated for better management of the COVID-19 outbreak; hence, there is an urgent need to understand the knowledge and preparedness of healthcare workers regarding the infection control COVID-19. Therefore, the present study aims to assess the knowledge and preparedness towards COVID-19 among dentists, undergraduate, and postgraduates in dental universities one year after the COVID-19 outbreak. The multi-centric cross-sectional study was conducted by evaluating 395 structured, pre-coded, and validated questionnaires obtained from sample units comprising full-time dental students (undergraduates, interns, and postgraduates) and dentists who were currently in practice and who were able to comprehend the languages English or Arabic. The first part of the questionnaire included questions related to demographic characteristics. The second part of the survey consisted of questions that address knowledge concerning COVID-19. The third part of the survey addressed questions based on the preparedness to fight against COVID-19 including sharp injuries during this period. Comparing the knowledge scores of dentists, dental undergraduates, and postgraduates using the ANOVA test, dentists have higher knowledge and preparedness scores than postgraduates and undergraduates (p-value < 0.05). Univariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that undergraduates and postgraduates were 2.567 and 1.352 times less aware of the personal protective measures against COVID-19 than dentists, respectively. Dentists had the comparatively better perception in knowledge and awareness of COVID-19 than undergraduates and postgraduates.