PURPOSE: Accidental sharps injuries are a potential route for transmission of blood-borne infection to healthcare workers. Ophthalmic staff in particular are at risk of sustaining such injuries due to the microsurgical nature of the speciality. Forthcoming European Union legislation aimed at reducing sharps injuries requires the development of risk-based sharps policy. The authors believe that this is the first study to assess the risks of sharps injuries and their management specific to ophthalmic practice within the European Union. METHODS: A retrospective review of all reported sharps injuries across three eye units in the UK over a period of 6 years was undertaken. Data were analysed to determine the circumstances surrounding the injury, occupation of the injured person, and whether appropriate actions were taken following incidents. RESULTS: A total of 68 sharps injuries were reported over the 6-year period. Nurses sustained 54.4% (n=37) of needlestick injuries, doctors 39.7% (n=27), and allied healthcare staff 5.9% (n=4). In all 51.5% (n=35) of sharps injuries occurred in the operating theatre, 30.9% (n=21) in the outpatient clinic, 13.2% (n=9) on the ophthalmic ward, and 4.4% (n=3) in unspecified locations. There was a median rate of 1.3 sharps injuries per 1000 surgical procedures per year and a range of 0.4-3.5 per 1000. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the need to raise awareness of the unique risks of sharps injuries in ophthalmic practice. This is necessary in order to develop speciality-specific policy that promotes strategies to reduce such injuries, enhances the accuracy of reporting of such events, and provides guidance for appropriate management.
PURPOSE: Accidental sharps injuries are a potential route for transmission of blood-borne infection to healthcare workers. Ophthalmic staff in particular are at risk of sustaining such injuries due to the microsurgical nature of the speciality. Forthcoming European Union legislation aimed at reducing sharps injuries requires the development of risk-based sharps policy. The authors believe that this is the first study to assess the risks of sharps injuries and their management specific to ophthalmic practice within the European Union. METHODS: A retrospective review of all reported sharps injuries across three eye units in the UK over a period of 6 years was undertaken. Data were analysed to determine the circumstances surrounding the injury, occupation of the injured person, and whether appropriate actions were taken following incidents. RESULTS: A total of 68 sharps injuries were reported over the 6-year period. Nurses sustained 54.4% (n=37) of needlestick injuries, doctors 39.7% (n=27), and allied healthcare staff 5.9% (n=4). In all 51.5% (n=35) of sharps injuries occurred in the operating theatre, 30.9% (n=21) in the outpatient clinic, 13.2% (n=9) on the ophthalmic ward, and 4.4% (n=3) in unspecified locations. There was a median rate of 1.3 sharps injuries per 1000 surgical procedures per year and a range of 0.4-3.5 per 1000. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the need to raise awareness of the unique risks of sharps injuries in ophthalmic practice. This is necessary in order to develop speciality-specific policy that promotes strategies to reduce such injuries, enhances the accuracy of reporting of such events, and provides guidance for appropriate management.
Authors: Peter A M Everts; Johannes T A Knape; Gernot Weibrich; Jacques P A M Schönberger; Johannes Hoffmann; Eddy P Overdevest; Henk A M Box; André van Zundert Journal: J Extra Corpor Technol Date: 2006-06
Authors: Martin A Makary; Peter J Pronovost; Eric S Weiss; E Anne Millman; David Chang; Susan P Baker; Edward E Cornwell; Dora Syin; Julie A Freischlag Journal: World J Surg Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 3.352