OBJECTIVES: To assess the knowledge of universal precautions for the delivery and operating rooms by residents and students and to evaluate their use of universal precautions. STUDY DESIGN: Obstetrics and gynecology (ob/gyn) residents (n = 30) and students (n = 31) from an inner-city, teaching hospital were polled by anonymous questionnaire to assess their knowledge of the appropriate barrier equipment for certain ob/gyn procedures. To determine actual compliance with universal precautions, 459 ob/gyn procedures were observed. We noted the use of appropriate barrier equipment for each procedure: gloves for pelvic exam and face shields, gowns, gloves, and booties for vaginal delivery, cesarean delivery, and dilation and curettage. The True Epistat statistical software program was used to perform simple regression analysis. RESULTS: Thirty residents (100%) knew the appropriate barrier equipment required for each type of procedure performed. One student (< 1%) did not know that booties were appropriate for the surgical procedures. Rationale for lack of compliance with universal precautions elicited by the questionnaire included time constraints (64%), inconvenience (52%), and presumption that patient was not infected (34%). The observed rate of compliance with universal precautions by participants indicates that individual compliance was inversely related to the years of experience (overall compliance rate of students was 96%; for first-year residents, 92%, second-year residents, 89%, third-year residents, 84%, fourth-year residents, 78%; r = -0.9918, P = 0.0009). CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge regarding universal precautions was nearly 100%, while overall observed compliance was only 89%. Compliance with universal precautions was better among students (96%) than among residents (88%). Compliance with universal precautions was inversely related to years of experience.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the knowledge of universal precautions for the delivery and operating rooms by residents and students and to evaluate their use of universal precautions. STUDY DESIGN: Obstetrics and gynecology (ob/gyn) residents (n = 30) and students (n = 31) from an inner-city, teaching hospital were polled by anonymous questionnaire to assess their knowledge of the appropriate barrier equipment for certain ob/gyn procedures. To determine actual compliance with universal precautions, 459 ob/gyn procedures were observed. We noted the use of appropriate barrier equipment for each procedure: gloves for pelvic exam and face shields, gowns, gloves, and booties for vaginal delivery, cesarean delivery, and dilation and curettage. The True Epistat statistical software program was used to perform simple regression analysis. RESULTS: Thirty residents (100%) knew the appropriate barrier equipment required for each type of procedure performed. One student (< 1%) did not know that booties were appropriate for the surgical procedures. Rationale for lack of compliance with universal precautions elicited by the questionnaire included time constraints (64%), inconvenience (52%), and presumption that patient was not infected (34%). The observed rate of compliance with universal precautions by participants indicates that individual compliance was inversely related to the years of experience (overall compliance rate of students was 96%; for first-year residents, 92%, second-year residents, 89%, third-year residents, 84%, fourth-year residents, 78%; r = -0.9918, P = 0.0009). CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge regarding universal precautions was nearly 100%, while overall observed compliance was only 89%. Compliance with universal precautions was better among students (96%) than among residents (88%). Compliance with universal precautions was inversely related to years of experience.
Authors: G D Kelen; T A DiGiovanna; D D Celentano; D Kalainov; L Bisson; E Junkins; A Stein; L Lofy; C R Scott; K T Sivertson Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr (1988) Date: 1990
Authors: D K Henderson; B J Fahey; M Willy; J M Schmitt; K Carey; D E Koziol; H C Lane; J Fedio; A J Saah Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 1990-11-15 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: J L Gerberding; C E Bryant-LeBlanc; K Nelson; A R Moss; D Osmond; H F Chambers; J R Carlson; W L Drew; J A Levy; M A Sande Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 1987-07 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: L B Seeff; E C Wright; H J Zimmerman; H J Alter; A A Dietz; B F Felsher; J D Finkelstein; P Garcia-Pont; J L Gerin; H B Greenlee; J Hamilton; P V Holland; P M Kaplan; T Kiernan; R S Koff; C M Leevy; V J McAuliffe; N Nath; R H Purcell; E R Schiff; C C Schwartz; C H Tamburro; Z Vlahcevic; R Zemel; D S Zimmon Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 1978-03 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Tarek Tawfik Amin; Khalid Ibrahim Al Noaim; Mohammed Ahmed Bu Saad; Turki Ahmed Al Malhm; Abdullah Abdulaziz Al Mulhim; Marwah Abdulaziz Al Awas Journal: Glob J Health Sci Date: 2013-04-21