2020
DOI: 10.4102/hsag.v25i0.1252
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Occupational exposure to blood and body fluids and use of human immunodeficiency virus post-exposure prophylaxis amongst nurses in a Gauteng Province hospital

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the current study, 51.3% of respondents who were exposed did not report their exposure. This finding is comparable to that of a study conducted among HCWs in the Eastern Region of Ghana, which reports that 49.3% of the participants did not report their exposure (Babanawo, 2016) and that of a study conducted among nurses in the Gauteng provincial hospital, South Africa, in which 46% of those exposed did not report their exposure (Rasweswe & Peu, 2020). The reasons for not reporting exposure in the current study included participants not knowing whom to report to (10.0%); being unaware of the availability of PEP (13.3%) and the source of exposure being an HIV-negative patient (48.3%).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the current study, 51.3% of respondents who were exposed did not report their exposure. This finding is comparable to that of a study conducted among HCWs in the Eastern Region of Ghana, which reports that 49.3% of the participants did not report their exposure (Babanawo, 2016) and that of a study conducted among nurses in the Gauteng provincial hospital, South Africa, in which 46% of those exposed did not report their exposure (Rasweswe & Peu, 2020). The reasons for not reporting exposure in the current study included participants not knowing whom to report to (10.0%); being unaware of the availability of PEP (13.3%) and the source of exposure being an HIV-negative patient (48.3%).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
“…The reasons for not reporting exposure in the current study included participants not knowing whom to report to (10.0%); being unaware of the availability of PEP (13.3%) and the source of exposure being an HIV-negative patient (48.3%). Similar reasons were given for not reporting in studies conducted in the New Juabeng Municipality in the Eastern Region of Ghana and in the Gauteng provincial hospital in South Africa (Babanawo, 2016;Rasweswe & Peu, 2020). It is important that frontline HCWs of the Ho Teaching Hospital be taken through the algorithm of reporting injury should they experience needle-prick or be occupationally exposed to HIV.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Health care workers are at an increased risk of contracting HIV after an occupational injury or exposure to infectious materials, such as blood, body tissue, body fluids, and contaminated environmental surfaces 4 with 3/1000 injuries resulting in HIV transmission after percutaneous exposure from an HIV-infected patient in health settings. 5 Percutaneous injury, usually inflicted by a hollow-bore needle, is the most common mechanism of occupational HIV transmission.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some participants in this study were even unaware of the reporting process entirely. Similarly to a previous study, some nurses expressed that they did not know where to report such incidents [ 39 ]. In addition, some participants thought they would not be infected even after the exposure, and some expressed fear of being criticized and facing discrimination.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%