Needlestick injuries in a major teaching hospital: the worthwhile effect of hospital-wide replacement of conventional hollow-bore needles

Needlestick and sharps injuries among healthcare workers in an oncology setting: a retrospective 7-year cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence of needlestick and sharps injuries (NSSIs) and associated factors among healthcare workers (HCWs) at King Hussein Cancer Centre (KHCC), Amman, Jordan.

METHODS

This retrospective cross-sectional study undertook a chart review of all HCWs that reported an NSSI between January 2015 and December 2021. Data collected included sociodemographic factors including age, sex, qualifications, and predictors of NSSIs such as working hours, work shift, and specific job roles within the oncology setting, work experience in KHCC, overall work experience and occupational category.

RESULTS

A total of 355 NSSIs were included in this study with a peak prevalence in 2019 (81 of 355; 22.8%). Nurses (220 of 355; 62.0%), housekeeping staff (59of 355; 16.6%) and physicians (45 of 355; 12.7%) were the most affected occupations. NSSIs were most common in the surgical floor (65 of 355; 18.3%) and operating rooms (56 of 355; 15.8%). Blood collection (94 of 355; 26.5%) and waste collection (65 of 355; 18.3%) were the two primary procedures resulting in NSSIs. The risk of injury was significantly associated with the locations of NSSIs, procedure that caused NSSIs, shift and overall experience.

CONCLUSION

NSSIs remain common among HCWs, which highlights the need for targeted education.

Needle-Stick Injuries in Ophthalmic Practice

Purpose

Needle-stick injuries (NSI) are a prominent route by which blood-borne infections are transmitted. The unique microsurgical nature of ophthalmic practice constitutes an additional risk to sustain injury. This study aimed to identify the epidemiological profile of needle-stick injuries in a tertiary eye center and to evaluate the implemented safety policy in preventing sharp injuries.

Methods

This was a retrospective cross-sectional study of all sharp injuries that occurred at King Khalid Eye Specialist Hospital (KKESH). Data on all reported sharp injury incidents from 2013 to 2021 were collected. The mechanisms of injury, context, location, and type of prick were collected and analyzed. Also, this study involved an institution-based survey for all ophthalmic staff.

Results

Two hundred and one sharp injury incidents were reported over 9 years. Physicians sustained 46.8% (n=94) of injuries, followed by nurses and ophthalmic technicians, 40.8% (n=82) and 7% (14); respectively. Operating and treatment rooms were the locations of 60.7% of incidents, whereas outpatient clinics and emergency rooms accounted for 19.4% and 13.4% of injuries, respectively.

Conclusion

The current findings add to the growing body of literature on the importance of NSI prevention and reporting strategies. In the present study, sharp injuries were most commonly encountered by ophthalmic staff in the operating rooms. Continuous staff education on handling sharp instruments, encouraging anonymous reporting, and up-to-date revisions of guidelines and policies are of paramount importance to lessen the burden of sharp injuries.

Polymeric and Composite Carriers of Protein and Non-Protein Biomolecules for Application in Bone Tissue Engineering

Conventional intake of drugs and active substances is most often based on oral intake of an appropriate dose to achieve the desired effect in the affected area or source of pain. In this case, controlling their distribution in the body is difficult, as the substance also reaches other tissues. This phenomenon results in the occurrence of side effects and the need to increase the concentration of the therapeutic substance to ensure it has the desired effect. The scientific field of tissue engineering proposes a solution to this problem, which creates the possibility of designing intelligent systems for delivering active substances precisely to the site of disease conversion. The following review discusses significant current research strategies as well as examples of polymeric and composite carriers for protein and non-protein biomolecules designed for bone tissue regeneration.

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.

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

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

Peripheral intravenous catheter needleless connector decontamination study-Randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Needleless connectors (NCs) were introduced to reduce health care work needlestick injuries (NSIs). If not decontaminated prior to use, NCs can be a portal for patient blood stream infections. The optimal disinfectant, and its application duration, for NC decontamination has not been empirically established.

METHODS

Factorial design randomized controlled trial comparing 70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA) and 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) in 70% IPA for 5, 10, or 15 seconds, in adult medical patients with peripheral intravenous catheters.

RESULTS

At baseline, 153 of 300 NCs (51%) grew microorganisms commonly found on the skin. Decontamination was successful in 150/153 (98%). There was no significant difference in decontamination between 70% IPA or 2% CHG in 70% IPA (P = .62), or decontamination for 5, 10, or 15 seconds (P = .21).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in the effectiveness of 70% IPA and 2% CHG in 70% IPA for NC decontamination for peripheral intravenous catheters in the clinical environment. Successful decontamination was not different for applications of 5, 10, and 15 seconds; 15 seconds did not always remove all microorganisms. Factors such as cost, feasibility of compliance, and low risk of allergy support 5 seconds decontamination with 70% IPA as an acceptable approach.

Cost-Effectiveness of Therapeutic Use of Safety-Engineered Syringes in Healthcare Facilities in India

BACKGROUND

Globally, 16 billion injections are administered each year of which 95% are for curative care. India contributes 25-30% of the global injection load. Over 63% of these injections are reportedly unsafe or deemed unnecessary.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained with the introduction of safety-engineered syringes (SES) as compared to disposable syringes for therapeutic care in India.

METHODS

A decision tree was used to compute the volume of needle-stick injuries (NSIs) and reuse episodes among healthcare professionals and the patient population. Subsequently, three separate Markov models were used to compute lifetime costs and QALYs for individuals infected with hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Three SES were evaluated-reuse prevention syringe (RUP), sharp injury prevention (SIP) syringe, and syringes with features of both RUP and SIP. A lifetime study horizon starting from a base year of 2017 was considered appropriate to cover all costs and consequences comprehensively. A systematic review was undertaken to assess the SES effects in terms of reduction in NSIs and reuse episodes. These were then modelled in terms of reduction in transmission of blood-borne infections, life-years and QALYs gained. Future costs and consequences were discounted at the rate of 3%. Incremental cost per QALY gained was computed to assess the cost-effectiveness. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was undertaken to account for parameter uncertainties.

RESULTS

The introduction of RUP, SIP and RUP + SIP syringes in India is estimated to incur an incremental cost of Indian National Rupee (INR) 61,028 (US$939), INR 7,768,215 (US$119,511) and INR 196,135 (US$3017) per QALY gained, respectively. A total of 96,296 HBV, 44,082 HCV and 5632 HIV deaths are estimated to be averted due to RUP in 20 years. RUP has an 84% probability to be cost-effective at a threshold of per capita gross domestic product (GDP). The RUP syringe can become cost saving at a unit price of INR 1.9. Similarly, SIP and RUP + SIP syringes can be cost-effective at a unit price of less than INR 1.2 and INR 5.9, respectively.

CONCLUSION

RUP syringes are estimated to be cost-effective in the Indian context. SIP and RUP + SIP syringes are not cost-effective at the current unit prices. Efforts should be made to bring down the price of SES to improve its cost-effectiveness.

Education and devices to prevent blood and body fluid exposures

BACKGROUND

Healthcare workers are at risk of blood and body fluid exposures (BBFE) while delivering care to patients. Despite recent technological advances such as safety-engineered devices (SEDs), these injuries continue to occur in healthcare facilities worldwide.

AIMS

To assess the impact of an education and SEDs workplace programme on rates of reported exposures.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study, utilizing interrupted time series analysis to examine reported exposures between 2005 and 2015 at a 600-bed hospital in Perth, Western Australia. The hospital wards were divided into four cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 2223 records were available for analysis. The intervention was most effective for the first cohort, with significant improvements both short-term (reduction of 12 (95% CI 7-17) incidents per 1000 full-time equivalent (FTE) hospital staff) and long-term (reduction of 2 (CI 0.6-4) incidents per 1000 FTE per year). Less significant or consistent impacts were observed for the other three cohorts. Overall, the intervention decreased BBFE exposure rates at the hospital level from 19 (CI 18-20) incidents per 1000 FTE pre-intervention to 11 (CI 10-12) incidents per 1000 FTE post-intervention, a 41% reduction. No exposures resulted in a blood-borne virus infection.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention was most effective in reducing exposures at a time when incidence rates were increasing. The overall effect was short-term and did not further reduce an already stabilized trend, which was likely due to improved safety awareness and practice, induced by the first cohort intervention.

Incidence and analysis of sharps injuries and splash exposures in a tertiary hospital in Southeast Asia: a ten-year review

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to report the ten-year incidence and trend of sharps injuries and splash exposures (SISE), and analyse the causative instruments and risk factors leading to these injuries to identify potential areas of improvement.

METHODS

A retrospective review of self-reported SISE incidents from 2005 to 2014 was conducted in Singapore General Hospital. Data was extracted from the electronic database of the Department of Infection Prevention and Control. Incidence of SISE was calculated per 1,000 healthcare workers (HCWs) per year.

RESULTS

Over the ten-year period, a total of 1,901 SISE were reported. The average SISE incidence per year was 110.5 per 1,000 doctors and 22.8 per 1,000 nursing staff, with an overall incidence of 28.9 per 1,000 HCWs. The incidence of SISE decreased from 30.3 to 22.0 per 1,000 HCWs per year from 2005 to 2014, while that for splash exposures increased from 1.9 to 3.7 per 1,000 HCWs per year. Doctors reported the highest number of SISE (43.7%), followed by nurses (37.7%). Top mechanisms of injury were intraoperative procedures (22.8%), drawing blood (14.4%) and splash exposures (13.7%).

CONCLUSION

Overall incidence of SISE decreased over the decade. Improved training and increasing use of safety devices, education and awareness could have contributed to the fall in incidence of sharps injuries; these measures should be reinforced and continued. However, the incidence of splash exposures increased over the same period. Preventive measures such as the use of protective goggles and face shields, together with personal protective equipment, should be emphasised and encouraged.

UK safety-engineered device use: changes since the 2013 sharps regulations

BACKGROUND

The 2013 UK sharps safety regulations require healthcare facilities to use safety-engineered devices (SEDs) to protect staff. The recent increase in UK-reported occupational exposures could indicate increased reporting or increased exposures from suboptimal SED use.

AIMS

To ascertain SED use through examination of sharps container contents in a sample of UK hospitals.

METHODS

Reusable sharps containers (RSCs) were selected from seven UK hospitals in 2013 and seven different hospitals in 2016. At licensed processing facilities, the operator, wearing protective apparel, decanted RSCs, separated hollow-bore needles (HBNs) from other sharps and enumerated HBNs into capped/uncapped non-SEDs, activated/non-activated/tampered SEDs, and blunt draw-up SEDs. Probability, risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence limits (95% CLs) were calculated using WinPepi v2.78.

RESULTS

In 2013 and 2016, respectively, 2545 HBNs were categorized from 22 RSCs versus 2959 HBNs from 33 RSCs; 70% of HBNs were SEDs versus 93% (P < 0.001; RR 1.33; CL 1.30-1.37); 32% of activatable HBNs were not activated versus 22% (<0.001; 0.67; 0.60-0.76); 41% of HBNs were discarded 'sharp' versus 20% (<0.001; 0.48; 0.44-0.52); 25% of HBNs were uncapped needles versus 6% (<0.001; 0.22; 0.19-0.26); 5% of HBNs were capped needles versus 1% (P > 0.05); and 1% of SEDs were tampered with in both years (P > 0.05). Hospital practices varied widely.

CONCLUSIONS

SED use and activation have increased significantly since 2013. Of concern is that in 2016, 22% of SEDs were non-activated and 20% of sharps were discarded 'sharp'. Increased training in SED handling, assiduous adherence to safe sharps work practices and a higher level of individual safety-ownership are indicated.

Epidemiology of needlestick and sharp injuries among health care workers based on records from 252 hospitals for the period 2010-2014, Poland

BACKGROUND

Needlestick and sharp injuries (NSIs) are an important element of public health and should be closely monitored. On the other hand there are no precise Polish data on a number of the occupational NSIs. The aim of the study was to assess the failure to report injuries and then to estimate the actual number of NSIs among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Poland based on the collected data.

METHODS

Analysis of injury registers on the basis of 252 hospitals in Poland. Conducting 487 surveys among doctors, nurses and paramedics. Calculation of rates of injuries per 1000 workers per year (with 95% confidence intervals (CI)). The level of statistical significance was set at p ≤ 0.05.

RESULTS

In the study period, 9775 NSIs were registered in the hospitals. Majority of the NSIs were recorded among nurses (72.6%,p < 0.01). The needle was the tool responsible for the greatest number of the NSIs in all professional groups (79.5%, p < 0.01). The average annual NSIs rates based on hospital registers were: 16.0/1000 doctors, 20.5/1000 nurses, 16.8/1000 paramedics. Every second NSIs was not reported (45.2%). We estimated that there are probably 13,567 NSIs every year among hospital care workers in Poland.

CONCLUSIONS

NSIs are a significant health problem for HCWs and should be subject to epidemiological surveillance. The purpose of the training of medical personnel should be to increase the number of injuries reported. The implementation of the epidemiological surveillance system will allow for the unification of the obtained data, which would be more comparable on the national scale as well as between different countries.

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

Background

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

Aim

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

Method

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

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.

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

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

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.

Risk Reduction of Needle Stick Injuries Due to Continuous Shift from Unsafe to Safe Instruments at a German University Hospital

This study assessed protective effects of a continuous introduction of safe instruments in terms of reduction of needle stick injuries. The retrospective study analyzed correlations between the increasing proportion of safe instruments and a reduction of the incidence of needle stick injuries linked to such instruments in a German university hospital over 5 years. Incidents declined about 17.6% from 80.3 incidents per 1000 employees to 66.2, associated with an increase in the proportions of injuries due to instruments without protective mechanisms such as scalpels or hypodermic needles by 12.2%. For injuries due to venipuncture cannulae in various surgical and internal medicine departments, there was a negative association between the proportion of safe instruments and the incidence of injuries. For injection needles, portacath needles, and lancets in selected internal medicine departments, the number of injuries also dropped during this study interval. However, there was no clear-cut association with the percentage of safe instruments. This observational study suggests a correlation between the implementation of use of safe instruments and the reduction of needle stick injuries in a case of a graduated implementation. However, the effects are much less pronounced than in previous interventional studies.

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.

How Much do Needlestick Injuries Cost? A Systematic Review of the Economic Evaluations of Needlestick and Sharps Injuries Among Healthcare Personnel

OBJECTIVE To provide an overview of the economic aspects of needlestick and sharps injury (NSI) management among healthcare personnel (HCP) within a Health Technology Assessment project to evaluate the impact of safety-engineered devices on health care METHODS A systematic review of economic analyses related to NSIs was performed in accordance with the PRISMA statement and by searching PubMed and Scopus databases (January 1997-February 2015). Mean costs were stratified by study approach (modeling or data driven) and type of cost (direct or indirect). Costs were evaluated using the CDC operative definition and converted to 2015 International US dollars (Int$). RESULTS A total of 14 studies were retrieved: 8 data-driven studies and 6 modeling studies. Among them, 11 studies provided direct and indirect costs and 3 studies provided only direct costs. The median of the means for aggregate (direct + indirect) costs was Int$747 (range, Int$199-Int$1,691). The medians of the means for disaggregated costs were Int$425 (range, Int$48-Int$1,516) for direct costs (9 studies) and Int$322 (range, Int$152-Int$413) for indirect costs (6 studies). When compared with data-driven studies, modeling studies had higher disaggregated and aggregated costs, but data-driven studies showed greater variability. Indirect costs were consistent between studies, mostly referring to lost productivity, while direct costs varied widely within and between studies according to source infectivity, HCP susceptibility, and post-exposure diagnostic and prophylactic protocols. Costs of treating infections were not included, and intangible costs could equal those associated with NSI medical evaluations. CONCLUSIONS NSIs generate significant direct, indirect, potential, and intangible costs, possibly increasing over time. Economic efforts directed at preventing occupational exposures and infections, including provision of safety-engineered devices, may be offset by the savings from a lower incidence of NSIs. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;37:635-646.

Needlestick injuries at a tertiary teaching hospital in Singapore

This study investigated the incidence and risk to staff groups for sustaining needlestick injuries (NSIs) in the National University Hospital (NUH), Singapore. A retrospective cohort review of incident NSI cases was undertaken to determine the injury rate, causation, and epidemiological profile of such injuries. Analysis of the risk of sustaining recurrent NSI by occupation and location was done using the Cox proportional hazards model. There were 244 NSI cases in 5957 employees in NUH in 2014, giving an incidence rate of 4·1/100 healthcare workers (HCWs) per year. The incidence rate was highest for doctors at 21·3, and 2·7 for nurses; 40·6% of injuries occurred in wards, and 32·8% in operating theatres. There were 27 cases of repeated NSI cases. The estimated cost due to NSIs in NUH ranged from US$ 109 800 to US$ 563 152 in 2014. We conclude that creating a workplace environment where top priority is given to prevention of NSIs in HCWs, is essential to address the high incidence of reported NSIs. The data collected will be of value to inform the design of prevention programmes to reduce further the risk of NSIs in 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.

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.

Two-year follow-up of the Collision Auto Repair Safety Study (CARSS)

This paper presents an evaluation of the sustainability of health and safety improvements in small auto collision shops 1 year after the implementation of a year-long targeted intervention. During the first year (active phase), owners received quarterly phone calls, written reminders, safety newsletters, and access to online services and in-person assistance with creating safety programs and respirator fit testing. During the second year (passive phase), owners received up to three postcard reminders regarding the availability of free health and safety resources. Forty-five shops received an evaluation at baseline and at the end of the first year (Y1). Of these, 33 were evaluated at the end of the second year (Y2), using the same 92-item assessment tool. At Y1, investigators found that between 70 and 81% of the evaluated items were adequate in each business (mean = 73% items, SD = 11%). At Y2, between 63 and 89% of items were deemed adequate (mean = 73% items, SD = 9.5%). Three safety areas demonstrated statistically significant (P < 0.05) changes: compressed gasses (8% improvement), personal protective equipment (7% improvement), and respiratory protection (6% decline). The number of postcard reminders sent to each business did not affect the degree to which shops maintained safety improvements made during the first year of the intervention. However, businesses that received more postcards were more likely to request assistance services than those receiving fewer.

Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C and HIV seroprevalence in critically ill emergency medicine department patients in a tertiary inner city hospital in Istanbul, Turkey

OBJECTIVE

Emergency medicine staff is working at risk of blood-borne infections during their daily practice every time. The risk of transmission is higher when dealing with critically ill patients. Our objective was to find out the prevalence of Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, and HIV, in critically ill red-coded emergency department patients.

METHODS

The study was carried out as prospective observational study between 1 September 2012 and 31 January 2013 in a tertiary inner city hospital emergency department in Istanbul, Turkey. Red triage coded patients managed in resuscitation room were enrolled.

RESULTS

One thousand patients were included during the study period. Fifty of them were HBV positive. Eighteen patients were HCV positive and 2 had both HBV and HCV. HIV was not recorded. Forty one of them were trauma patients. There were 226 unconscious or uncooperative patients. Prior blood transfusion history was present in 92 of the patients and among them 11 had HBV and 3 had HCV. Four patients or their relatives were aware of their HCV positivity. HBV positivity was already known by the patients or their relatives. Total HBV vaccination ratio was 7.4%.

CONCLUSION

Prevalence of HCV (1.8%) and HBV(5%) seroprevalence in our study group was very low which correlated with the recent literature regarding the Turkish population. HIV was not detected during the study period. This may also be accepted as consistent with the very low number of reported cases in Turkey.

Impact of a single safety-engineered device on the occurrence of percutaneous injuries in a general hospital in Brazil

BACKGROUND

Health care workers are exposed to bloodborne pathogens through occupational injuries, and the replacement of sharps by safety-engineered devices has been recommended as a key preventive measure. This recommendation has been difficult to implement in Brazil.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of selected data from a database of blood and body fluid exposures reported from January 2007 through December 2011 in a public general hospital in Rio de Janeiro where, from the end of 2009, a safety lancet for blood glucose testing (BGT) was introduced. A log-binomial model was used to evaluate the effect of the introduction of the safety lancet on the proportion of percutaneous injuries (PIs) during BGT in the nursing staff.

RESULTS

Nursing staff had a significant reduction in rate of PIs per 100 full-time equivalents from 2007 to 2011 (P < .001), and medical residents had the highest rate throughout the same period. A reduction of PIs by small-gauge needles was observed since 2009, and injuries during BGT fell abruptly in 2010 and 2011 paralleling the number of purchased safety lancets (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The adoption of a single safety device, which required no training, significantly reduced PIs among the nursing team.

Sharps injuries: the risks and relevance to plastic surgeons

Surgeons are at risk for injury in the operating room daily. Because of the ubiquity of occupational hazards, injuries remain prevalent and expensive. Although occupational hazards can include musculoskeletal conditions, psychosocial stress, radiation exposure, and the risk of communicable diseases, sharps injuries remain the most common among surgeons in practice and the most frequent route of transmission of blood-borne pathogens. Therefore, increased attention to the health, economic, personal, and social implications of these injuries is essential for appropriate management and future prevention.

Chinks in the armor: percutaneous injuries from hollow bore safety-engineered sharps devices

BACKGROUND

Despite their overwhelming efficacy, safety-engineered sharp devices (SESDs) cause a residual fraction of injuries. Although the fraction of injuries from SESDs is less than that reported for nonsafety devices, it remains a "preventable fraction" and is a sizable target for further advances.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 3,297 percutaneous injuries from hollow bore safety-engineered devices occurring between 2001 and 2009 was conducted examining the Exposure Prevention Information Network (EPINet) needlestick surveillance data.

RESULTS

Nurses sustain 64.6% of all SESD injuries. 42.9% Of SESD injuries occur after device use and are likely preventable through consistent and effective use of safety-engineered technology. Excluding injuries that occurred during device use or between procedural steps, 71.8% (n/N = 28/39) of physician injuries, 58.2% (n/N = 645/1,109) of injuries to nurses, and 45.8% (n/N = 88/192) of injuries to phlebotomists occurred when an available SESD was not fully activated.

CONCLUSION

Passive devices that do not require action on the part of the end user to engage a safety feature currently represent a small portion of the SESD market. Wider dissemination of a broader array of passive SESDs coupled with continual education of end users is essential to an effective sharps injury prevention program.

Impact of infection control educational activities on rates and frequencies of percutaneous injuries (PIs) at a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia

OBJECTIVE

To study the impact of educational activities on the rates and frequencies of percutaneous injuries (PIs) at a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

PI surveillance is a routine activity in King Abdulaziz Medical City (a 900-bed teaching tertiary health care hospital) in Riyadh using the Exposure Prevention Information Network (EPINet) data collection tool. From 2001 through 2003, educational activities were conducted for health care workers (HCWs) to prevent PIs. The education included lectures on the risk of unsafe practices that may lead to PIs and how to avoid them. Data from before (1997-2000) and after (2004-2008) the intervention were imported from our surveillance system and statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

The total overall rate of PIs per 1000 HCWs was significantly lower in the post-intervention period than in the pre-intervention period (14 vs. 32.8/1000 HCWs, respectively). The rates of PIs among nurses and housekeepers showed a significant decrease (15 vs. 37.6/1000 HCWs and 10 vs. 34.5/1000 HCWs, respectively). The frequency of PIs in the emergency department (ED) and intensive care units (ICUs) showed a significant decrease (3.4% for both vs. 12.4% and 13.7%, respectively). PIs associated with devices, such as needles on IV lines, IV catheters, lancets and suture needles, showed a significant decrease. PIs occurring during device disassembly and from inappropriately discarded devices also decreased significantly.

CONCLUSION

The educational program reduced some categories of PIs, including the overall rate, the rate among nurses and housekeepers, the frequency in the ED and ICUs and the frequency among needles on IV lines, IV catheters, lancets and suture needles. Other PI categories did not change significantly.

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.

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.

Needlestick injury rates according to different types of safety-engineered devices: results of a French multicenter study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the incidence of needlestick injuries (NSIs) among different models of safety-engineered devices (SEDs) (automatic, semiautomatic, and manually activated safety) in healthcare settings.

DESIGN

This multicenter survey, conducted from January 2005 through December 2006, examined all prospectively documented SED-related NSIs reported by healthcare workers to their occupational medicine departments. Participating hospitals were asked retrospectively to report the types, brands, and number of SEDs purchased, in order to estimate SED-specific rates of NSI. Setting. Sixty-one hospitals in France.

RESULTS

More than 22 million SEDs were purchased during the study period, and a total of 453 SED-related NSIs were documented. The mean overall frequency of NSIs was 2.05 injuries per 100,000 SEDs purchased. Device-specific NSI rates were compared using Poisson approximation. The 95% confidence interval was used to define statistical significance. Passive (fully automatic) devices were associated with the lowest NSI incidence rate. Among active devices, those with a semiautomatic safety feature were significantly more effective than those with a manually activated toppling shield, which in turn were significantly more effective than those with a manually activated sliding shield (P < .001, chi(2) test). The same gradient of SED efficacy was observed when the type of healthcare procedure was taken into account.

CONCLUSIONS

Passive SEDs are most effective for NSI prevention. Further studies are needed to determine whether their higher cost may be offset by savings related to fewer NSIs and to a reduced need for user training.

Occupational exposure of health care personnel to hepatitis B and hepatitis C: prevention and surveillance strategies

Ensuring the safety of personnel working in health care environments can be challenging and requires a multifaceted approach to target reductions in occupational exposures to blood-borne pathogens, such as hepatitis B or hepatitis C. This article reviews the epidemiology of occupational exposures to hepatitis B and hepatitis C in health care personnel in hospital settings. The nature and likelihood of risk to health care personnel are evaluated along with estimates of seroconversion risk. The review focuses on prevention programs and available surveillance programs to aid in monitoring and reducing occupational exposures to blood-borne pathogens.

Impact of infection control activities on the rate of needle stick injuries at a tertiary care hospital of Pakistan over a period of six years: an observational study

Background

Accidental exposure to blood and body fluids is frequent among health care workers. They are at high risk of nosocomial transmission of blood borne pathogens due to injuries caused by used sharps. We are reporting impact of surveillance and educational program on the rate of needle stick injuries among health care workers at a tertiary care hospital in Pakistan.

Methods

At Aga Khan University Hospital sharp injuries are reported to infection control office. To reduce these incidents a quality improvement project was inducted in the year 2005. Health care workers were educated; surveillance data from 2002 to 2007 was analyzed and compared with various risk factors.

Results

During study period 1382 incidents were reported. Junior doctors sustained highest number of injuries (n = 394; 28.5%) followed by registered nurses (n = 283; 20.4%). Highest number of incidents was reported during blood collection (19%). An increasing trend was observed in the pre intervention years (2002–04). However noticeable fall was noted in the post intervention period that is in year 2006 and 2007. Major decline was noted among nurses (from 13 to 5 NSI/100 FTE/year). By relating and comparing the rates with various activities directly linked with the use of syringes a significant reduction in incidents were found including; hospital admissions (p-value 0.01), surgeries and procedures performed (p = 0.01), specimens collected in the laboratory (p = 0.001) and patients visits in clinics (p = 0.01).

Conclusion

We report significant reduction in needle stick injuries especially during post intervention study period. This is being achieved by constant emphasis on improving awareness by regular educational sessions, implemented as a quality improvement project.

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.