Needlestick Injury in Hospital Personnel: A Multicenter Survey From Central Italy

1992 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. 540-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Albertoni ◽  
Giuseppe Ippolito ◽  
Nicola Petrosillo ◽  
Lorenzo Sommella ◽  
Vincenzo Di Nardo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Hepatitis B ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Student Nurses ◽  
Injury Rate ◽  
Needlestick Injury ◽  
Public Hospitals ◽  
Hospital Personnel ◽  
Hospital Workers ◽  
Multicenter Survey

AbstractObjectives:To assess the rate of needlestick injury in hospital personnel in an Italian region. To identify risk factors potentially amenable to correction.Design:Hospital workers undergoing hepatitis B prevaccination testing in 1985 through 1986 were interviewed regarding needlestick injury in the previous year, job category, area of work, years of employment, and other pertinent information.Setting:Of the 98 public hospitals of the Latium region, 68 participated in the survey: 32 of 55 with less than 200 beds, 20 of 25 with 200 to 300 beds, 11 of 13 with 400 to 900 beds, and all of the 5 with more than 1,000 beds.Participants:All healthcare workers providing direct patient care or environmental services as well as student nurses were invited by the hospital directors to undergo hepatitis B prevaccination testing and vaccination, if eligible.Results:Of 30,226 hospital workers of the 68 participating hospitals, 20,055 were interviewed (66.3%): 47.7% of the 7,172 doctors, 71% of the 14,157 nurses, 55.9% of the 2,513 technicians, and 71.9% of the 6,384 ancillary workers. Needlestick injury was recalled by 29.3%; the rates were 54.9%, 35.3%, 33.8%, 26.5%, 18.7%, and 14.7% in surgeons, registered and unskilled nurses, physicians, ancillary workers, and technicians, respectively. The recalled injury rate was 39.7% and 34.0% in surgical and intensive care areas; in infectious diseases, it was 16.7%. Bates were lower in hospitals with 200 to 300 beds (25.6%). The needlestick injury rate declined from 32% in those with less than 5 years of employment to 28% in those with more than 20 years (p<.01). Prevalence of HBV infection was higher in student nurses and young workers recalling a needlestick exposure (14.3% and 15.8%, respectively), versus 10.1% and 12.8% in those not exposed (p<.01 and <.05, respectively).Conclusions:Parenteral exposure to bloodborne infectious agents is a relevant risk among healthcare workers in our region, particularly in defined job categories and hospital areas (surgeons, nurses, surgical, and intensive care areas). Immunization and educational efforts should be made along with better designs of devices to reduce the risk of infection.

Effect of the Introduction of an Engineered Sharps Injury Prevention Device on the Percutaneous Injury Rate in Healthcare Workers

2007 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madelyn Azar-Cavanagh ◽  
Pam Burdt ◽  
Judith Green-McKenzie
Keyword(s):  
Injury Prevention ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Injury Rate ◽  
Needlestick Injury ◽  
Hospital Policy ◽  
Bloodborne Pathogens ◽  
Safety Features ◽  
Sharps Injury ◽  
Hospital Wards

Objective.To evaluate the effect of introducing an engineered device for preventing injuries from sharp instruments (engineered sharps injury prevention device [ESIPD]) on the percutaneous injury rate in healthcare workers (HCWs).Methods.We undertook a controlled, interventional, before-after study during a period of 3 years (from January 1998 through December 2000) at a major medical center. The study population was HCWs with potential exposure to bloodborne pathogens. HCWs who sustain a needlestick injury are required by hospital policy to report the exposure. A confidential log of these injuries is maintained that includes information on the date and time of the incident, the type and brand of sharp device involved, and whether an ESIPD was used.Intervention.Introduction of an intravenous (IV) catheter stylet with a safety-engineered feature (a retractable protection shield), which was placed in clinics and hospital wards in lieu of other IV catheter devices that did not have safety features. No protective devices were present on suture needles during any of the periods. The incidence of percutaneous needlestick injury by IV catheter and suture needles was evaluated for 18 months before and 18 months after the intervention.Results.After the intervention, the incidence of percutaneous injuries resulting from IV catheters decreased significantly (P < .01), whereas the incidence of injuries resulting from suture needle injuries increased significantly (P < .008).Conclusion.ESIPDs lead to a reduction in percutaneous injuries in HCWs, helping to decrease HCWs' risk of exposure to bloodborne pathogens.

Needlestick Injury in Hospital Personnel: A Multicenter Survey from Central Italy

1992 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. 540-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Albertoni ◽  
Giuseppe Ippolito ◽  
Nicola Petrosillo ◽  
Lorenzo Sommella ◽  
Vincenzo Di Nardo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Central Italy ◽  
Needlestick Injury ◽  
Hospital Personnel ◽  
Multicenter Survey

European Recommendations for the Management of Healthcare Workers Occupationally Exposed to Hepatitis

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 49
Author(s):  
Enis Uruci
Keyword(s):  
Occupational Exposure ◽  
Hepatitis B ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Antiviral Treatment ◽  
World Health ◽  
Antibody Concentration ◽  
Post Exposure Prophylaxis ◽  
Transferase Activity ◽  
Mediterranean Countries

Exposure prevention is the primary strategy to reduce the risk of occupational bloodborne pathogen infections in healthcare workers (HCW). HCWs should be made aware of the medicolegal and clinical relevance of reporting an exposure, and have ready access to expert consultants to receive appropriate counselling, treatment and follow-up. Vaccination against hepatitis B virus (HBV), and demonstration of immunisation before employment are strongly recommended. HCWs with postvaccinal anti-HBs levels, 1-2 months after vaccine completion, .or=10 mIU/mL are considered as responders. Responders are protected against HBV infection: booster doses of vaccine or periodic antibody concentration testing are not recommended. Alternative strategies to overcome non-response should be adopted. Isolated anti-HBc positive HCWs should be tested for anti-HBcIgM and HBV-DNA: if negative, anti-HBs response to vaccination can distinguish between infection (anti-HBs .or=50 mIU/ml 30 days after 1st vaccination: anamnestic response) and false positive results(anti-HBs .or=10 mUI/ml 30 days after 3rd vaccination: primary response); true positive subjects have resistance to re-infection. and do not need vaccination The management of an occupational exposure to HBV differs according to the susceptibility of the exposed HCW and the serostatus of the source. When indicated, post-exposure prophylaxis with HBV vaccine, hepatitis B immunoglobulin or both must be started as soon as possible (within 1-7 days). In the absence of prophylaxis against hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, follow-up management of HCV exposures depends on whether antiviral treatment during the acute phase is chosen. Test the HCW for HCV-Ab at baseline and after 6 months; up to 12 for HIV-HCV co-infected sources. If treatment is recommended, perform ALT (amino alanine transferase) activity at baseline and monthly for 4 months after exposure, and qualitative HCV-RNA when an increase is detected. Introduction Bloodborne pathogens such as hepatitis B (HBV) and C virus (HCV) represent an important hazard for healthcare workers (HCWs) (1). In the general population, HCV prevalence varies geographically from about 0.5% in northern countries to 2% in Mediterranean countries, with some 5 million chronic carriers estimated in Europe; while HBV prevalence ranges from 0.3% to 3%. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that each year in Europe 304 000 HCWs are exposed to at least one percutaneous injury with a sharp object contaminated with HBV, 149 000 are exposed to HCV and 22 000 to HIV. The probability of acquiring a bloodborne infection following an occupational exposure has been estimated to be on average.

scholarly journals SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and asymptomatic viral carriage in healthcare workers: a cross-sectional study

Thorax ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (12) ◽  
pp. 1089-1094 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Shields ◽  
Sian E Faustini ◽  
Marisol Perez-Toledo ◽  
Sian Jossi ◽  
Erin Aldera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Venous Blood ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
University Hospitals ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
General Internal ◽  
Increased Risk

ObjectiveTo determine the rates of asymptomatic viral carriage and seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in healthcare workers.DesignA cross-sectional study of asymptomatic healthcare workers undertaken on 24/25 April 2020.SettingUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (UHBFT), UK.Participants545 asymptomatic healthcare workers were recruited while at work. Participants were invited to participate via the UHBFT social media. Exclusion criteria included current symptoms consistent with COVID-19. No potential participants were excluded.InterventionParticipants volunteered a nasopharyngeal swab and a venous blood sample that were tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA and anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein antibodies, respectively. Results were interpreted in the context of prior illnesses and the hospital departments in which participants worked.Main outcome measureProportion of participants demonstrating infection and positive SARS-CoV-2 serology.ResultsThe point prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 viral carriage was 2.4% (n=13/545). The overall seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was 24.4% (n=126/516). Participants who reported prior symptomatic illness had higher seroprevalence (37.5% vs 17.1%, χ2=21.1034, p<0.0001) and quantitatively greater antibody responses than those who had remained asymptomatic. Seroprevalence was greatest among those working in housekeeping (34.5%), acute medicine (33.3%) and general internal medicine (30.3%), with lower rates observed in participants working in intensive care (14.8%). BAME (Black, Asian and minority ethnic) ethnicity was associated with a significantly increased risk of seropositivity (OR: 1.92, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.23, p=0.01). Working on the intensive care unit was associated with a significantly lower risk of seropositivity compared with working in other areas of the hospital (OR: 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.78, p=0.02).Conclusions and relevanceWe identify differences in the occupational risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 between hospital departments and confirm asymptomatic seroconversion occurs in healthcare workers. Further investigation of these observations is required to inform future infection control and occupational health practices.

scholarly journals Covid-19 Vaccine Acceptance, Hesitancy and Refusal among Canadian Healthcare Workers: a Multicenter Survey

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefania Dzieciolowska ◽  
Denis Hamel ◽  
Souleymane Gadio ◽  
Maude Dionne ◽  
Dominique Gagnon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Vaccine Acceptance ◽  
Multicenter Survey ◽  
Canadian Healthcare

Increasing hepatitis B vaccination coverage of healthcare workers — global lessons for South Africa

2021 ◽  
Vol 71 ◽  
pp. 6-12
Author(s):  
Rosemary Joyce Burnett ◽  
Angela Dramowski ◽  
Edina Amponsah-Dacosta ◽  
Johanna Catharina Meyer
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Hepatitis B ◽  
Vaccination Coverage ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Hepatitis B Vaccination

scholarly journals Socioeconomic and Behavioral Correlates of COVID-19 Infections among Hospital Workers in the Greater Jakarta Area, Indonesia: A Cross-Sectional Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (10) ◽  
pp. 5048
Author(s):  
Adrianna Bella ◽  
Mochamad Thoriq Akbar ◽  
Gita Kusnadi ◽  
Olivia Herlinda ◽  
Putri Aprilia Regita ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Worker ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Hospital Staff ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Household Size ◽  
Risk Of Infection ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Hospital Workers ◽  
Behavioral Correlates ◽  
Cross Sectional

(1) Background: because of close contacts with COVID-19 patients, hospital workers are among the highest risk groups for infection. This study examined the socioeconomic and behavioral correlates of COVID-19 infection among hospital workers in Indonesia, the country hardest-hit by the disease in the Southeast Asia region. (2) Methods: we conducted a cross-sectional study, which collected data from 1397 hospital staff from eight hospitals in the Greater Jakarta area during April–July 2020. The data was collected using an online self-administered questionnaire and Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) tests. We employed descriptive statistics and adjusted and unadjusted logistic regressions to analyze the data of hospital workers as well as the subgroups of healthcare and non-healthcare workers. (3) Results: from a total of 1397 hospital staff in the study, 22 (1.6%) were infected. In terms of correlates, being a healthcare worker (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 8.31, 95% CI 1.27–54.54) and having a household size of more than five (AOR = 4.09, 1.02–16.43) were significantly associated with a higher risk of infection. On the other hand, those with middle- and upper-expenditure levels were shown to have a lower risk of infection (AOR = 0.06, 0.01–0.66). Behavioral factors associated with COVID-19 infection among healthcare and non-healthcare workers included knowledge of standard personal protective equipment (PPE) (AOR = 0.08, 0.01–0.54) and application of the six-step handwashing technique (AOR = 0.32, 0.12–0.83). (4) Conclusion: among hospital staff, correlates of COVID-19 infection included being a healthcare worker, household size, expenditure level, knowledge and use of PPE, and application of appropriate hand washing techniques.

scholarly journals Hand hygiene and the sequence of patient care

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Nai-Chung Chang ◽  
Michael Jones ◽  
Heather Schacht Reisinger ◽  
Marin L. Schweizer ◽  
Elizabeth Chrischilles ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Hand Hygiene ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Intensive Care Units ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Hand Hygiene Compliance ◽  
Resistant Bacteria ◽  
Surgical Intensive Care ◽  
Hygiene Compliance ◽  
Hand Hygiene Opportunity

Abstract Objective: To determine whether the order in which healthcare workers perform patient care tasks affects hand hygiene compliance. Design: For this retrospective analysis of data collected during the Strategies to Reduce Transmission of Antimicrobial Resistant Bacteria in Intensive Care Units (STAR*ICU) study, we linked consecutive tasks healthcare workers performed into care sequences and identified task transitions: 2 consecutive task sequences and the intervening hand hygiene opportunity. We compared hand hygiene compliance rates and used multiple logistic regression to determine the adjusted odds for healthcare workers (HCWs) transitioning in a direction that increased or decreased the risk to patients if healthcare workers did not perform hand hygiene before the task and for HCWs contaminating their hands. Setting: The study was conducted in 17 adult surgical, medical, and medical-surgical intensive care units. Participants: HCWs in the STAR*ICU study units. Results: HCWs moved from cleaner to dirtier tasks during 5,303 transitions (34.7%) and from dirtier to cleaner tasks during 10,000 transitions (65.4%). Physicians (odds ratio [OR]: 1.50; P < .0001) and other HCWs (OR, 2.15; P < .0001) were more likely than nurses to move from dirtier to cleaner tasks. Glove use was associated with moving from dirtier to cleaner tasks (OR, 1.22; P < .0001). Hand hygiene compliance was lower when HCWs transitioned from dirtier to cleaner tasks than when they transitioned in the opposite direction (adjusted OR, 0.93; P < .0001). Conclusions: HCWs did not organize patient care tasks in a manner that decreased risk to patients, and they were less likely to perform hand hygiene when transitioning from dirtier to cleaner tasks than the reverse. These practices could increase the risk of transmission or infection.

scholarly journals Future Healthcare Workers and Hepatitis B Vaccination: A New Generation

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (15) ◽  
pp. 7783
Author(s):  
Andrea Trevisan ◽  
Paola Mason ◽  
Annamaria Nicolli ◽  
Stefano Maso ◽  
Marco Fonzo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatitis B ◽  
Antibody Titer ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Lower Percentage ◽  
Hepatitis B Vaccination ◽  
High Morbidity ◽  
One Year ◽  
Mandatory Vaccination ◽  
University Of Padua ◽  
The University

Before the introduction of universal vaccination, hepatitis B caused high morbidity and mortality, especially among healthcare workers. In the present study, the immune status against hepatitis B was assessed in a cohort of 11,188 students of the degree courses of the School of Medicine of the University of Padua (Italy) who had been subjected to mandatory vaccination in childhood or adolescence and who will be future healthcare workers. The variables that influence the antibody response to vaccination are mainly the age at which the vaccine was administered and sex. If vaccination was administered before one year of age, there is a high probability (around 50%) of having an antibody titer lower than 10 IU/L compared to those vaccinated after one year of age (12.8%). The time between vaccine and analysis is not decisive. Furthermore, female sex, but only if vaccination was administered after one year of age, shows a significant (p = 0.0008) lower percentage of anti-HBs below 10 IU/L and a greater antibody titer (p < 0.0001). In conclusion, the differences related to the age of vaccination induce more doubts than answers. The only plausible hypothesis, in addition to the different immune responses (innate and adaptive), is the type of vaccine. This is not easy to verify because vaccination certificates rarely report it.

scholarly journals Occupational Sharp Injury and Splash Exposure among Healthcare Workers in a Tertiary Hospital

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roshan Mathew ◽  
Ritin Mohindra ◽  
Ankit Sahu ◽  
Rachana Bhat ◽  
Akshaya Ramaswami ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Hepatitis B ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Hepatitis B Surface Antigen ◽  
Tertiary Hospital ◽  
Needle Stick Injury ◽  
Medical Procedures ◽  
Immunodeficiency Virus ◽  
History Of ◽  
Hepatitis C Virus Antibody

Abstract Background Occupational hazards like sharp injury and splash exposure (SISE) are frequently encountered in health-care settings. The adoption of standard precautions by healthcare workers (HCWs) has led to significant reduction in the incidence of such injuries, still SISE continues to pose a serious threat to certain groups of HCWs. Materials and Methods This was a retrospective study which examined the available records of all patients from January 2015 to August 2019 who self-reported to our emergency department with history of sharp injury and/or splash exposure. Details of the patients, mechanism of injury, the circumstances leading to the injury, status of the source (hepatitis B surface antigen, human immunodeficiency virus, and hepatitis C virus antibody status), and the postexposure prophylaxis given were recorded and analyzed. Data were represented in frequency and percentages. Results During the defined period, a total of 834 HCWs reported with SISE, out of which 44.6% were doctors. Majority of the patients have SISE while performing medical procedures on patients (49.5%), while 19.2% were exposed during segregation of waste. The frequency of needle stick injury during cannulation, sampling, and recapping of needle were higher in emergency department than in wards. More than 80% of HCWs received hepatitis B vaccine and immunoglobulin postexposure. Conclusion There is need for periodical briefings on practices of sharp handling as well as re-emphasizing the use of personal protective equipment while performing procedures.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document