Literature DB >> 29326541

Assessing the Biological Safety Profession's Evaluation and Control of Risks Associated with the Field Collection of Potentially Infectious Specimens.

Scott J Patlovich1, Robert J Emery1, Lawrence W Whitehead1, Eric L Brown1, Rene Flores1.   

Abstract

Because the origins of the biological safety profession are rooted in the control and prevention of laboratory-associated infections, the vocation focuses primarily on the safe handling of specimens within the laboratory. But in many cases, the specimens and samples handled in the lab are originally collected in the field where a broader set of possible exposure considerations may be present, each with varying degrees of controllability. The failure to adequately control the risks associated with collecting biological specimens in the field may result in illness or injury, and could have a direct impact on laboratory safety, if infectious specimens were packaged or transported inappropriately, for example. This study developed a web-based survey distributed to practicing biological safety professionals to determine the prevalence of and extent to which biological safety programs consider and evaluate field collection activities. In cases where such issues were considered, the data collected characterize the types of controls and methods of oversight at the institutional level that are employed. Sixty-one percent (61%) of the survey respondents indicated that research involving the field collection of biological specimens is conducted at their institutions. A majority (79%) of these field collection activities occur at academic institutions. Twenty-seven percent (27%) of respondents indicated that their safety committees do not consider issues related to biological specimens collected in the field, and only 25% with an oversight committee charged to review field collection protocols have generated a field research-specific risk assessment form to facilitate the assembly of pertinent information for a project risk assessment review. The results also indicated that most biosafety professionals (73% overall; 71% from institutions conducting field collection activities) have not been formally trained on the topic, but many (64% overall; 87% from institutions conducting field collection activities) indicated that training on field research safety issues would be helpful, and even more (71% overall; 93% from institutions conducting field collection activities) would consider participation in such a training course. Results obtained from this study can be used to develop a field research safety toolkit and associated training curricula specifically targeted to biological safety professionals.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biological Specimens; Biosafety; Field Collection; Field Research Safety; and Biological Risk Assessment

Year:  2015        PMID: 29326541      PMCID: PMC5760186          DOI: 10.1177/153567601502000104

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Biosaf        ISSN: 1535-6760


  12 in total

1.  Gastrointestinal and respiratory tract symptoms following brief environmental exposure to aerosols during a pfiesteria-related fish kill.

Authors:  D T Haselow; E Brown; J K Tracy; R Magnien; L M Grattan; J G Morris; D W Oldach
Journal:  J Toxicol Environ Health A       Date:  2001-08-24

2.  CONTINUING IMPORTANCE OF LABORATORY-ACQUIRED INFECTIONS.

Authors:  R M PIKE; S E SULKIN; M L SCHULZE
Journal:  Am J Public Health Nations Health       Date:  1965-02

3.  Field studies and the IACUC: protocol review, oversight, and occupational health and safety considerations.

Authors:  Kathy Laber; Bruce W Kennedy; Larry Young
Journal:  Lab Anim (NY)       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 12.625

4.  Survey of laboratory-acquired infections.

Authors:  S E SULKIN; R M PIKE
Journal:  Am J Public Health Nations Health       Date:  1951-07

5.  Guidelines for biosafety laboratory competency: CDC and the Association of Public Health Laboratories.

Authors:  Judy R Delany; Michael A Pentella; Joyce A Rodriguez; Kajari V Shah; Karen P Baxley; David E Holmes
Journal:  MMWR Suppl       Date:  2011-04-15

6.  Laboratory-associated infections: summary and analysis of 3921 cases.

Authors:  R M Pike
Journal:  Health Lab Sci       Date:  1976-04

Review 7.  Laboratory-associated infections: incidence, fatalities, causes, and prevention.

Authors:  R M Pike
Journal:  Annu Rev Microbiol       Date:  1979       Impact factor: 15.500

8.  Past and present hazards of working with infectious agents.

Authors:  R M Pike
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  1978-07       Impact factor: 5.534

9.  Probable non-vector-borne transmission of Zika virus, Colorado, USA.

Authors:  Brian D Foy; Kevin C Kobylinski; Joy L Chilson Foy; Bradley J Blitvich; Amelia Travassos da Rosa; Andrew D Haddow; Robert S Lanciotti; Robert B Tesh
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 6.883

10.  Occupationally acquired american cutaneous leishmaniasis.

Authors:  Maria Edileuza Felinto de Brito; Maria Sandra Andrade; Ericka Lima de Almeida; Angela Cristina Rapela Medeiros; Roberto Pereira Werkhäuser; Ana Isabele Freitas de Araújo; Sinval Pinto Brandão-Filho; Alzira Maria Paiva de Almeida; Eduardo Henrique Gomes Rodrigues
Journal:  Case Rep Dermatol Med       Date:  2012-11-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.