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

Lavoie, Marie‐Claude; Verbeek, Jos; Pahwa, Manisha

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd009740.pub2

Cited by 35 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Avoiding recapping of needles as far as possible for disposal has been a prime emphasis in modern medical practice. 1,[8][9][10][11] Safety engineered needles and devices having features such as shields or retractable needles have proven efficacy for the prevention of these injuries. However inaccessibility and under use of such devices in the setting of Nepal may be a major contributing factor for NSI.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge and Practice of Health Care Workers regarding Needle Stick Injuries in a Tertiary Care Center of Nepal

Singh

Paudel

2017

Kathmandu Univ. Med. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Needle stick injuries are common health hazards among health care workers. Considering the increasing prevalence of body fluid borne infectious diseases; knowledge regarding the common errors and universal precautions are vital for the prevention of such accidents.Objective This study aimed to assess for knowledge and practice approaches among health care workers regarding needle stick injuries.Method This is a cross sectional survey was conducted using an anonymous, self-reporting 25-item structured questionnaire at a tertiary care center of central Nepal. A total of 165 health care personnel of working experience of more than 6 months were included in the study. Questionnaire included aspects of prevalence and knowledge on needle stick injury, hepatitis B immunization status and post exposure prophylaxis for HIV.Result Prevalence of needle stick injury was found to be 703 per 1000 health care worker (70.3%) during their working tenure and majority of the injury happened among nurses (p<0.05) besides other professions. Seventy nine (47.9%) participants experienced the injury more than one time in their career and the mean number of injury was 2.06±1.16. The practice of needle recapping is still prevalent and 80% participants often use single handed technique. Vaccination against hepatitis B virus was not completed by 31% health workers. Inadequate knowledge about post exposure prophylaxis for HIV was reported by 46% participants.Conclusion High prevalence of needle stick injury with a high rate of ignorance was noted. These issues need to be addressed, through appropriate education and interventional strategies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge and Practice of Health Care Workers regarding Needle Stick Injuries in a Tertiary Care Center of Nepal

Singh

Paudel

2017

Kathmandu Univ. Med. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To prevent NSIs, hospital managers should establish safe systems of work and should promote compliance with standard infection control procedures (33). Although it has been proposed that the safety features of devices, such as shields or retractable needles, can possibly contribute to the prevention of NSIs, a comprehensive systematic review of the literature found that the results from different studies were inconsistent, and there was no clear evidence of a benefit (34). However, we cannot conclude that safety-engineered devices are not effective.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Occupational Exposure to Blood and Other Body Fluids Among Healthcare Workers in Three Teaching Hospitals, Southeast Iran

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) regularly face the risk of exposure to sharp injuries and splashes as an occupational hazard, which presents a major risk for acquiring blood-borne infectious agents. Objectives: This study aimed to determine the occurrence of needlestick injuries (NSIs) and other high-risk occupational exposures to blood and body fluids (BBFs) among HCWs in three teaching hospitals affiliated with the Zahedan University of Medical Sciences. Patients and Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out from March 2013 to December 2014. Information on self-reported incidents, circumstances surrounding occupational exposure, and post-exposure management were collected from an ongoing surveillance system. Descriptive statistics and chi square tests were used for data analysis. Results: A total of 236 incidents of occupational exposure were registered during the study period. Nurses (82, 34.7%) were most frequently exposed to BBFs, followed by physicians (57, 24.2%). Two hundred and nineteen (92.8%) of the personnel sustained NSIs, and 17 (7.2%) had splashes to mucus membranes. The incidents were most frequently reported from the internal medicine ward (19.1%) followed by the operating theater (17.1%). Subjects with splashes to mucus membranes were more likely to postpone seeking medical advice following exposure, as compared with needlestick cases (23.5% versus 5%, P < 0.016). A significantly greater proportion of pediatric and emergency department staff were found to delay post-exposure measures (P < 0.040). Conclusions:The relatively high prevalence of percutaneous injuries and splashes in this study emphasized the importance of improved prevention strategies, better hospital surveillance for occupational exposure, and enhanced training of healthcare workers.

show abstract

“…Needlestick injuries did decline at all three sites following the transition to SENs; however, a number of injuries continued to be reported. Ongoing injuries following the mandatory use of SENs have been described in a number of jurisdictions (Chambers et al 2015;Jagger et al 2010;Jagger and Perry 2003;Stringer et al 2011;WorkSafeBC 2011) and in studies of SEN efficacy (Lavoie et al 2014;Tuma and Sepkowitz 2006). As revealed in this study, there are a number of barriers to completely eliminating needlestick injuries under current conditions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…There was an expectation that the mandatory use of SENs could eliminate up to 90% of injuries in the province (Bill 1279(Bill 2005. Controlled studies that have examined the efficacy of SENs have documented considerable variation in outcomes (Lavoie et al 2014;Tuma and Sepkowitz 2006). Less-than-optimal outcomes have also been documented in other jurisdictions that have established regulatory standards to promote the adoption of SENs (Chambers et al 2015;Jagger et al 2008Jagger et al , 2010Stringer et al 2011).…”

Section: Résumémentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers to the Adoption of Safety-Engineered Needles Following a Regulatory Standard: Lessons Learned from Three Acute Care Hospitals

Chambers

Mustard

Holness

et al. 2015

hcpol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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

Cited by 35 publications

References 70 publications

Knowledge and Practice of Health Care Workers regarding Needle Stick Injuries in a Tertiary Care Center of Nepal

Knowledge and Practice of Health Care Workers regarding Needle Stick Injuries in a Tertiary Care Center of Nepal

Occupational Exposure to Blood and Other Body Fluids Among Healthcare Workers in Three Teaching Hospitals, Southeast Iran

Barriers to the Adoption of Safety-Engineered Needles Following a Regulatory Standard: Lessons Learned from Three Acute Care Hospitals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About