Glove usage and reporting of needlestick injuries by junior hospital medical staff. (1/257)

The use of gloves when conducting invasive procedures and the reporting of needlestick injuries have been strongly encouraged. Despite this, neither practice appears to be universal. In order to determine the rates of glove usage and needlestick injury reporting, we conducted a survey of junior doctors in three hospitals in the UK. Of the 190 respondents, the majority rarely wore gloves for venesection, insertion of intravenous cannulas or arterial blood gas sampling. For more major procedures (insertion of central venous lines, insertion of thoracostomy tubes, suturing) gloves were invariably worn. Only 17.5% of needlestick injuries were reported. The rates of glove usage and needlestick injury reporting were lower than previous studies have demonstrated in North America. Surgeons suffered the most needlestick injuries and were the least likely to report them. The low reporting rate may have serious implications, particularly in view of the new Government guidelines on needlestick injuries which involve HIV-infected blood. By failing to use gloves and report needlestick injuries, junior doctors, in particular surgeons, are placing themselves and patients at increased risk of blood-borne transmissible diseases.  (+info)

Needlestick and sharps injuries among health-care workers in Taiwan. (2/257)

Sharps injuries are a major cause of transmission of hepatitis B and C viruses and human immunodeficiency virus in health-care workers. To determine the yearly incidence and causes of sharps injuries in health-care workers in Taiwan, we conducted a questionnaire survey in a total of 8645 health care workers, including physicians, nurses, laboratory technicians, and cleaners, from teaching hospitals of various sizes. The reported incidence of needlestick and other sharps injuries was 1.30 and 1.21 per person in the past 12 months, respectively. Of most recent episodes of needlestick/sharps injury, 52.0% were caused by ordinary syringe needles, usually in the patient units. The most frequently reported circumstances of needlestick were recapping of needles, and those of sharps injuries were opening of ampoules/vials. Of needles which stuck the health-care workers, 54.8% had been used in patients, 8.2% of whom were known to have hepatitis B or C, syphilis, or human immunodeficiency virus infection. Sharps injuries in health-care workers in Taiwan occur more frequently than generally thought and risks of contracting blood-borne infectious diseases as a result are very high.  (+info)

Needlestick injury in clothing industry workers and the risks of blood-borne infection. (3/257)

This paper identifies the hazard of a hollow needle device used extensively in the clothing industry and assesses the risk of transmission for HIV, Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C. A substantial risk of transmission is suggested and measures have been advised for its control. Occupational Health Physicians are advised to be aware of hollow needles in other industrial processes and where risks of cross-infection exist, the same safety considerations should be applied as in clinical medicine and veterinary work to avoid needlestick injuries. Needle sharing must be avoided.  (+info)

Sensible approaches to avoid needle stick accidents in nuclear medicine. (4/257)

OBJECTIVE: Needle sticks are a continuous concern in the health care environment because of the prevalence of bloodborne pathogens in today's society. Radioactive contamination is another concern with needle sticks during nuclear medicine and nuclear pharmacy procedures. In our institution, substantial efforts have been made to prevent needle sticks, but they still occur occasionally. The purpose of this project was to analyze different practices and products to determine the best protocol in an effort to avoid further needle sticks. METHODS: The nuclear medicine technologists were surveyed to determine how many needle sticks have occurred and the situation behind each occurrence. Using our initial survey, the circumstances involved in each incident were reviewed, suggestions considered, and various means of protection analyzed. Five options were presented in a second survey. RESULTS: The results of the second survey showed that technologists favored the newly designed needle-capping blocks for preventing needle sticks in their daily routine procedures. CONCLUSION: The newly designed needle-capping block is best suited for both nuclear medicine and nuclear pharmacy laboratories. We will continue to monitor the effectiveness of this new approach in preventing needle sticks.  (+info)

Reported needlestick and sharp injuries among health care workers in a Greek general hospital. (5/257)

Between July 1990 and June 1996, 284 exposures to infectious material were reported by 247 health care workers (HCWs) at AHEPA University Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece, representing an overall rate of 2.4% reported injuries per 100 HCWs/year. Nurses reported the highest rates of incidents (3.0%) and in all but one working group women exhibited higher injury rates per year than male HCWs. Young workers (21-30 years old) were primarily affected in incidents (P < 0.001). Needles were the most common implement causing injury (60.6%) and resheathing of used needles as well as garbage collection were common causes of injury. None of the HCWs seroconverted in exposures where immune status to blood-borne pathogens was estimated. Efforts by the infection control committee need to be more intense, in order to increase the rate of reported staff injuries. This will facilitate identification of unsafe practices and provide more adequate preventive measures.  (+info)

Safety of immunization injections in Africa: not simply a problem of logistics. (6/257)

In 1995, the WHO Regional Office for Africa launched a logistics project to address the four main areas of immunization logistics: the cold chain, transport, vaccine supply and quality, and the safety of injections in the countries of the region. The impact of this logistic approach on immunization injection safety was evaluated through surveys of injection procedures and an analysis of the injection materials (e.g. sterilizable or disposable syringes) chosen by the Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) and those actually seen to be used. Re-use of injection materials without sterilization, accidental needle-stick injuries among health care workers, and injection-related abscesses in patients were common in countries in the WHO African Region. Few health centres used time-steam saturation-temperature (TST) indicators to check the quality of sterilization and, in many centres, the injection equipment was boiled instead of being steam sterilized. Facilities for the proper disposal of used materials were rarely present. Although the official EPI choice was to use sterilizable equipment, use of a combination of sterilizable and disposable equipment was observed in the field. Unsafe injection practices in these countries were generally due to a failure to integrate nursing practices and public awareness with injection safety issues, and an absence of the influence of EPI managers on health care service delivery. Holistic rather than logistic approaches should be adopted to achieve safe injections in immunization, in the broader context of promoting safe vaccines and safety of all injections.  (+info)

A comparison of certain practice characteristics of dental anesthesiologists in Canada and the United States. (7/257)

An existing database was used to compare aspects of dental anesthesiology practice of dental anesthesiologists in Canada (n = 32) and the United States (n = 123). Data focusing on percutaneous injuries were obtained through a mailed questionnaire that was returned anonymously. Respondents provided information on the treatment of patients under deep sedation or general anesthesia only. Eighty-one percent of Canadians and 61% of Americans returned the questionnaire. The vast majority (84%) of injuries reported were due to sharps associated with general dentistry compared with those associated with anesthesiology. Canadians were more likely to be operator-anesthetists (P < .01) and to experience a percutaneous injury (P < .01) than US practitioners. American practitioners were more likely to have a greater proportion of the caseload under the age of 20 (P < .02). No other significant differences were observed. These results illustrate a number of unique attributes of the practice of dental anesthesiology in these 2 countries.  (+info)

The occupational risk to dental anesthesiologists of acquiring 3 bloodborne pathogens. (8/257)

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the occupational risk to dental anesthesiologists of contracting 3 bloodborne pathogens: hepatitis B (HBV), hepatitis C (HCV), and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). METHODS: Through an anonymously returned, mailed questionnaire, dental anesthesiologists in Canada and the United States provided information regarding percutaneous and mucocutaneous contacts with contaminated fluid during the treatment of patients under deep sedation and general anesthesia as well as other general practice information. A mathematical model was applied to determine the occupational risk. RESULTS: Of the 101 (65%) returned questionnaires, 98 reported having treated patients within the previous 6 months. Of these, 41 (42%) had at least one percutaneous accident (89 accidents in total), and the projected mean annual injury rate for dental anesthesiologists overall was 1.82. The most common causes of injury were burs, intraoral needles, and dental instruments. Operator error during use was associated with 31% of reported accidents. Significantly more injuries were reported by those who also reported a mucocutaneous contact and by those working more than 25 hours per week. The projected mean annual number of mucocutaneous exposures was 0.88 for dental anesthesiologists overall. CONCLUSIONS: The calculated annual risk to the average dental anesthesiologist of acquiring HBV (if not immune), HCV, and HIV following percutaneous injury was very low for all infections (HBV the most; HIV the least). The risk of contracting HIV following mucocutaneous contact was extremely low.  (+info)