The prevalence and underreporting of needlestick injuries among hospital workers: a cross-sectional study

Objective Needlestick and sharps injuries (NSIs) are known occupational risks among health-care workers. Reporting these injuries is important for early prevention and management of blood-borne infections. We investigated the prevalence and characteristics of NSIs and underreporting among hospital workers (HWs) from different sectors. Methods A single-center cross-sectional study, involving an anonymous survey delivered to 2205 HWs. The survey included demographic information about the worker and information about training, injuries and reporting. Results Of the 844 HWs respondents (40%), NSIs occurred in 443 of them (53%); the majority were from needles (68%) and at bedside (51%). Significantly higher prevalences of injuries (P < 0.001) were noted among physicians (75%) and workers in their 40s (61%) and in the emergency and surgical departments (66% and 55%, respectively). NSIs were reported among 28% of workers who did not directly use needles. Underreporting was found in 46%, with a significant decrease in the report rate as the number of injuries increased (P < 0.001). Underreporting was significantly more common (P < 0.001) among physicians (59%), especially seniors (72%), workers without training about NSIs (59%), older age groups (56% in workers above 51 years, P = 0.003) and males (54%, P = 0.01). The highest underreporting rate was in injuries occurring in the operating room and the lowest in witnessed injuries occurring while passing a needle (82% vs. 31%, P < 0.001). Conclusions NSIs and underreporting are common among HWs from all sectors, including those who do not use needles. Improving preventive measures and reporting should be encouraged. We recommend reducing bedside procedures as possible and assigning two workers to procedures at risk for injuries, to increase the report rate.

Needlestick and sharps injuries in an Indonesian tertiary teaching hospital from 2014 to 2017: a cohort study

ObjectiveNeedlestick and sharps injuries among healthcare workers (HCWs) pose significant occupational health problems. We aim to provide incidence and other epidemiological aspects of needlestick and sharp injuries (NSSIs) among HCWs in a tertiary teaching hospital in Indonesia, to inform the evaluation of NSSIs prevention programme.MethodsA cohort study was conducted at Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital in Jakarta. We analysed data of the sharps injury programme at the hospital between January 2014 and December 2017. Incidence of NSSIs was calculated per 1000 person-years (1000-PY).ResultsOver the 4-year period, a total of 286 NSSIs were reported. The mean NSSIs incidence rate for 4 years was 13.3/1000-PY, peaking in 2015 (15.5/1000-PY) then decreasing afterward. Most NSSIs were experienced by nurses (42.7%), but the highest incidence was among midwives (18.9/1000-PY), followed by nurses, medical students and medical doctors (15.2/1000-PY, 12.6/1000-PY and 11.8/1000-PY, respectively). The devices causing the highest proportion of NSSIs were hollow-bore needles (66.8%), followed by suture needles (14.3%) and solid needles (10.8%). 9.4% of NSSIs were related to insulin pen injection. Of all the incidents, 31.3% occurred during surgical procedures, 25.9% during blood collections, 14.3% during administering injection of drugs and 13.3% during waste cleaning.ConclusionIn conclusion, this study showed varied incidences of NSSI among different occupations, with the highest among midwives and nurses. Many unsafe work practices still continue, which is of utmost concern. We suggest opportunities for prevention including training and cultivating safer workplace practices.

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.

Study-Related Work and Commuting Accidents among Students at the University of Mainz from 12/2012 to 12/2018: Identification of Potential Risk Groups and Implications for Prevention

Background: Universities represent an important setting of everyday life for health promotion. The aim of the present study was to assess whether university students of specific disciplines might have an increased risk for having a study-related work accident and to analyze what types of study-related work accidents occur most frequently. Furthermore, knowledge regarding study-related commuting accidents will be provided by identifying places where study-related commuting accidents might occur most frequently and on potential types of commuting (walking vs. biking) which might be associated with an increased risk for having a study-related commuting accident. Methods: Retrospective analyses of a dataset provided by the Accident Insurance Fund of Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany, including all accidents that happened at the University of Mainz (JGU) between December 2012 and December 2018 were performed. Binominal tests were computed to reveal whether the frequency of study-related work accidents in students affiliated with a specific faculty or institution differs significantly from the expected frequency of all reported study-related work accidents. Results: Overall, 1285 study-related accidents were analyzed—of which, 71.8% were work and 28.2% commuting accidents. Students of ‘Faculty—Medicine’ (80.5%; p = 0.003), ‘Faculty—Chemistry, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Geography and Geosciences’ (90.7%; p < 0.001), and students that participated in study-related sports activities (97.4%; p ≤ 0.001) had a significantly increased risk for the occurrence of a study-related work accident. Needlestick and sharps injuries (NSIs) as well as lab accidents play a pivotal role. Furthermore, above 40% of the study-related commuting accidents were cycling accidents. Conclusions: There is a call for prevention in order to decrease the number of NSIs among medical students, lab accidents as well as sport-related accidents. Concrete implications for prevention are discussed in the present paper. In addition, given that students are among the most likely to bicycle, and given that most bicycle-related accidents involve fatal injuries, cycling safety campaigns need to be initiated on campus.