Dataset Information

Needlestick Injuries in Interventional Radiology Are Common and Underreported.

ABSTRACT: Purpose To determine the prevalence of and risk factors for needlesticks in interventional radiology physicians, as well as the attitudes, behaviors, and conditions that promote or interfere with reporting of these injuries. Materials and Methods A total of 3889 interventional radiologists from academic and private practice in the United States were surveyed by emailing all interventional radiologist members of the Society of Interventional Radiology, including attending-level physicians and trainees (April-August 2016). The institutional review board waived the need for consent. Questions inquired about the nature, frequency, and type of needlestick and sharps injuries and whether and to whom these incidents were reported. Stepwise regression was used to determine variables predicting whether injuries were reported. Results In total, 908 (23%) interventional radiologists completed at least a portion of the survey. Eight hundred fourteen (91%) of 895 respondents reported a prior needlestick injury, 583 (35%) of 895 reported at least one injury while treating an HIV-positive patient, and 626 (71%) of 884 reported prior training regarding needlestick injury. There was, on average, one needlestick for every 5 years of practice. Most needlestick or sharps injuries were self inflicted (711 [87%] of 817) and involved a hollow-bore device (464 [56%] of 824). Only 566 (66%) of 850 injuries were reported. The most common reasons for not reporting included perceived lack of utility of reporting (79 [28%] of 282), perceived low risk for injury (56 [20%] of 282), noncontaminated needle (53 [19%] of 282), too-lengthy reporting process (37 [13%] of 282), and associated stigma (23 [8%] of 282). Only 156 (25%) of 624 respondents informed their significant other. Stepwise regression assessing variables affecting the likelihood of reporting showed that male sex (P = .009), low-risk patient (P < .0001), self injury (P = .010), trainee status (P < .0001), and the total number of prior injuries (P = .019) were independent predictors of not reporting. Conclusion Needlestick injuries are ubiquitous among interventional radiologists and are often not reported. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

SUBMITTER: Deipolyi AR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5708289 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Needlestick Injuries in Interventional Radiology Are Common and Underreported.

Deipolyi Amy R AR Prabhakar Anand M AM Naidu Sailendra S Oklu Rahmi R

Radiology 20170619 3

Purpose To determine the prevalence of and risk factors for needlesticks in interventional radiology physicians, as well as the attitudes, behaviors, and conditions that promote or interfere with reporting of these injuries. Materials and Methods A total of 3889 interventional radiologists from academic and private practice in the United States were surveyed by emailing all interventional radiologist members of the Society of Interventional Radiology, including attending-level physicians and tra ...[more]

PMID: 28631962

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionOver the past decades, the treatment for blunt splenic injuries has shifted from operative to non-operative management. Interventional radiology such as splenic arterial embolisation generally increases the success rate of non-operative management. However, the type of intervention, such as the first definitive treatment for haemostasis (interventional radiology or surgery) in blunt splenic injuries is unclear. Therefore, we aim to clarify whether interventional radiology improves mortality in patients with blunt splenic trauma compared with operative management by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.Methods and analysisWe will search the following electronic bibliographic databases to retrieve relevant articles for the literature review: Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We will include controlled trials and observational studies published until September 2018. We will screen search results, assess the study population, extract data and assess the risk of bias. Two review authors will extract data independently, and discrepancies will be identified and resolved through a discussion with a third author where necessary. Data from eligible studies will be pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis. Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed by using the Mantel-Haenszel χ² test and the I² statistic, and any observed heterogeneity will be quantified using the I² statistic. We will conduct sensitivity analyses according to several factors relevant for the heterogeneity.Ethics and disseminationOur study does not require ethical approval as it is based on the findings of previously published articles. This systematic review will provide guidance on selecting a method for haemostasis of splenic injuries and may also identify knowledge gaps that could direct further research in the field. Results will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentations at relevant conferences.Prospero registration numberCRD42018108304.

Dataset Information

Needlestick Injuries in Interventional Radiology Are Common and Underreported.

Publications

Needlestick Injuries in Interventional Radiology Are Common and Underreported.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets