Literature DB >> 8821109

Do protective devices prevent needlestick injuries among health care workers?

R Orenstein1, L Reynolds, M Karabaic, A Lamb, S M Markowitz, E S Wong.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and direct of two protective devices-a shielded 3 ml safety syringe (Safety-Lok; Becton Dickinson and Co., Becton Dickinson Division, Franklin Lakes, N.J.) and the components of a needleless IV system (InterLink; Baxter Healthcare Corp., Deerfield, Ill.)--in preventing needlestick injuries to health care workers.
DESIGN: Twelve-month prospective, controlled, before-and-after trial with a standardized questionnaire to monitor needlestick injury rates.
SETTING: Six hospital inpatient units, consisting of three medical units, two surgical units (all of which were similar in patient census, acuity, and frequency of needlesticks), and a surgical-trauma intensive care unit, at a 900-bed urban university medical center. PARTICIPANTS: All nursing personnel, including registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, nursing aides, and students, as well as medical teams consisting of an attending physician, resident physician, interns, and medical students on the study units. INTERVENTION: After a 6-month prospective surveillance period, the protective devices were randomly introduced to four of the chosen study units and to the surgical-trauma intensive care unit.
RESULTS: Forty-seven needlesticks were reported throughout the entire study period, 33 in the 6 months before and 14 in the 6 months after the introduction of the protective devices. Nursing staff members who were using hollow-bore needles and manipulating intravenous lines accounted for the greatest number of needlestick injuries in the pre-intervention period. The overall rate of needlestick injury was reduced by 61%, from 0.785 to 0.303 needlestick injuries per 1000 health care worker-days after the introduction of the protective devices (relative risk = 1.958; 95% confidence interval, 1.012 to 3.790; p = 0.046). Needlestick injury rates associated with intravenous line manipulation, procedures with 3 ml syringes, and sharps disposal were reduced by 50%; however, reductions in these subcategories were not statistically significant. No seroconversions to HIV-1 or hepatitis B virus seropositivity occurred among those with needlestick injuries. The direct cost for each needlestick prevented was $789.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite an overall reduction in needlestick injury rates, no statistically significant reductions could be directly attributed to the protective devices. These devices are associated with a significant increase in cost compared with conventional devices. Further studies must be concurrently controlled to establish the effectiveness of these devices.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 8821109     DOI: 10.1016/0196-6553(95)90264-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Infect Control        ISSN: 0196-6553            Impact factor:   2.918


  6 in total

1.  Safety engineered injection devices for intramuscular, subcutaneous and intradermal injections in healthcare delivery settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Alain C Harb; Rami Tarabay; Batoul Diab; Rami A Ballout; Selma Khamassi; Elie A Akl
Journal:  BMC Nurs       Date:  2015-12-30

Review 2.  Knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, values, preferences, and feasibility in relation to the use of injection safety devices in healthcare settings: a systematic review.

Authors:  Rami Tarabay; Rola El Rassi; Abeer Dakik; Alain Harb; Rami A Ballout; Batoul Diab; Selma Khamassi; Elie A Akl
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2016-07-13       Impact factor: 3.186

3.  Risk Reduction of Needle Stick Injuries Due to Continuous Shift from Unsafe to Safe Instruments at a German University Hospital.

Authors:  Hagen Frickmann; Wibke Schmeja; Emil Reisinger; Thomas Mittlmeier; Karen Mitzner; Norbert Georg Schwarz; Philipp Warnke; Andreas Podbielski
Journal:  Eur J Microbiol Immunol (Bp)       Date:  2016-08-23

4.  Evaluating the implementation of health and safety innovations under a regulatory context: a collective case study of Ontario's safer needle regulation.

Authors:  Andrea Chambers; Cameron A Mustard; Curtis Breslin; Linn Holness; Kathryn Nichol
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2013-01-22       Impact factor: 7.327

Review 5.  Use of safety-engineered devices by healthcare workers for intravenous and/or phlebotomy procedures in healthcare settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Rami A Ballout; Batoul Diab; Alain C Harb; Rami Tarabay; Selma Khamassi; Elie A Akl
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2016-09-01       Impact factor: 2.655

6.  Economic Evaluation of Occupational Safety and Health Interventions From the Employer Perspective: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Aikaterini Grimani; Gunnar Bergström; Martha Isabel Riaño Casallas; Emmanuel Aboagye; Irene Jensen; Malin Lohela-Karlsson
Journal:  J Occup Environ Med       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 2.162

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.