Standard precaution knowledge and adherence: Do Doctors differ from Medical Laboratory Scientists?

Abstract

BackgroundDoctors and laboratory scientists are at risk of infection from blood borne pathogens during routine clinical duties. After over 20 years of standard precautions, health care workers knowledge and compliance is not adequate.AimThis study is aimed at comparing adherence and knowledge of standard precautions (SP) among Medical Laboratory Scientists (MLSs) and doctors.MethodsIt was a cross sectional study done at University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital, ItukuOzalla. A semi structured pre-tested questionnaire was the study instrument.ResultsGeneral knowledge of SP was high,76.2% in doctors and 67.6% in MLSs although there were differences between the two groups on the knowledge of components of SP. Safe injection practices, use of personal protective equipment as well as safe handling of contaminated equipment or surfaces was higher amongst doctors. Even though more than half of respondents in both groups, 53.1 % among doctors and 58.1% among MLSs had received training on standard precautions, this did not reflect in the practice. MLS reported more use of personal protective equipment such as gloves and coveralls (100% in MLS and 35% of doctors), P<0.001. Recapping of syringes was higher amongst doctors (63.6%) than MLS (55.1%).The doctors practiced better hand hygiene than MLS (P<0.001). Constraints that affected SP included non-availability of PPEs and emergency situations for both groups.ConclusionSP knowledge and practice are still low, and as such, there is a need to train doctors and MLS on the components of SP. Policies on SP need to be enforced and facilities for practice regularly supplied.

Knowledge and Compliance with Standard Precautions amongst Healthcare Workers in Selected Hospitals in Rivers State, Nigeria

“…Also HCWs was reported to have low level of knowledge of SPs in Ghana [10]. HCWs are not continually informed on SPs principles, insufficiencies or lack of knowledge and practice of SPs [13][14][15]. This study is at variance with Aluko et al [15] who stated that 89% of HCWs (89%) had good knowledge about SPs in health care facilities (HCFs).…”

Facing the Coronavirus Pandemic: An Integrated Continuing Education Program in Taiwan

“…Moreover, the Infection Control Center was asked to conduct several face-to-face physical training courses on donning and doffing protective equipment, which was filmed and made into videos to illustrate standard operating procedures for colleagues’ reference at any time [ 22 , 23 ]. To encourage the hospital staff to complete this online ten-question test and online reading course, those who answered all ten questions correctly in the pre-test or post-test received one hour of certification for continuing education on emerging infectious diseases in the hospital.…”

Fatores que influenciam a adesão às medidas de precaução padrão e de contato no cuidado à pacientes críticos: Revisão integrativa

“…Assim sendo, foram identificados como fatores que influenciam a adesão dos profissionais às medidas de precaução padrão e de contato: a falta de conscientização, mitos e crenças por parte dos profissionais, baixa percepção de risco, descuido/esquecimento, jornadas excessivas, ritmo intenso de trabalho, falta de tempo para vestir os EPIs, ausência de recursos adequados, plantões noturnos, desgaste físico e emocional, equipes reduzidas, excesso de confiança, estresse, falta ou insuficiência de insumos, baixo compromisso da gestão hospitalar, má qualidade dos equipamentos de proteção individual, armazenamento em local distante do ponto de assistência, desconforto ao uso ou irritação cutânea, deficiente de capacitação técnica e carência de treinamentos (Porto & Marziale, 2016;Piai-Morais et al, 2015;Castro & Rodrigues, 2019;Barros et al, 2019;Boeira et al, 2019;Alvim & Gazzinelli, 2017;Moralejo et al, 2018;Ndu & Arinze-Onyia, 2017).…”

“…Por ter como foco as medidas de precaução padrão, o estudo ainda traz dados sobre o manejo de perfurocortantes, demonstrando que apenas 47,5% adotavam o comportamento de não reencapar agulhas usadas, enquanto o manejo e descarte dos mesmos eram realizados de forma correta por 100% dos profissionais (Faria et al, 2019). Corroborando com o achado, um estudo realizado na Nigéria com 143 médicos e 136 patologistas clínicos, apontou que 63,3% dos médicos e 55,1% dos patologistas ainda reencapam as agulhas antes de descarta-las (Ndu & Arinze-Onyia, 2017). Apesar da relevância dessa medida para prevenção de infecções e acidentes laborais, informações sobre a adesão da mesma foram explicitadas somente em três de oito estudos ao qual tinham como foco, total ou parcial, as medidas de precaução padrão.…”