Dataset Information

Needlestick prevention devices: data from hospital surveillance in Piedmont, Italy-comprehensive analysis on needlestick injuries between healthcare workers after the introduction of safety devices.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Needlestick and sharps injuries (NSIs) involving healthcare workers (HCWs) are worldwide under surveillance since long time; the implementation of the European Directive 32/2010 regarding the mandatory use of safety-engineered devices (SEDs) seems to have reduced the number of these accidents. Our surveillance investigated the frequency and the modality of SED-related NSIs in the Piedmont region to verify changes in the epidemiology of these events.

Methods

We analysed the exposure records of NSIs, device usage data and structural data of 42 acute care hospitals and compared conventional and safety devices. We calculated the accident rates per 100?000 needles and, as a measure of SED efficacy, the relative risk between the use of safety and non-safety devices with a 95% CI. We also described the dynamics of the NSIs and the most involved professional groups of HCWs, procedures and devices.

Results

Total and specific device accident rates for 100?000 needles were lower with the use of SEDs. In 2015-2016, there were 1640 NSIs, with a decreasing absolute number during the observation period; 18% were SEDs related. Half of the total accidents with SEDs occurred in the patient's room, and nurses were involved in 78% of the cases. The most involved devices were the butterfly needles and peripheral venous catheters, and the most involved procedures were venous sampling (40%) and phlebotherapy (16%). The exposures occurred mostly during the procedure, and 45% of the SED-related injuries occurred during the disposal of the device; 92% of the SEDs involved had a manual activation mechanism.

Conclusion

In agreement with the results of other European studies, our results show that SEDs reduce the risk of percutaneous exposure of HCWs, but in introducing SEDs, we must select those with a higher level of safety (with a passive activation mechanism) and improve the healthcare staff training programmes.

SUBMITTER: Ottino MC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6887025 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Needlestick prevention devices: data from hospital surveillance in Piedmont, Italy-comprehensive analysis on needlestick injuries between healthcare workers after the introduction of safety devices.

Ottino Maria Chiara MC Argentero Andrea A Argentero Pier Angelo PA Garzaro Giacomo G Zotti Carla Maria CM

BMJ open 20191119 11

<h4>Objective</h4>Needlestick and sharps injuries (NSIs) involving healthcare workers (HCWs) are worldwide under surveillance since long time; the implementation of the European Directive 32/2010 regarding the mandatory use of safety-engineered devices (SEDs) seems to have reduced the number of these accidents. Our surveillance investigated the frequency and the modality of SED-related NSIs in the Piedmont region to verify changes in the epidemiology of these events.<h4>Methods</h4>We analysed t ...[more]

PMID: 31748292

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNeedlestick and sharp injuries (NSI) carry the risk of transmitting numerous bloodborne pathogens, leading to both health and economic burdens. The underreporting of NSIs among healthcare workers (HCWs) is a global issue of concern, as timely treatment and prevention of complications rely on proper reporting. Underreporting further impedes accurate surveillance and appropriate resource allocation, with developed and developing nations facing disparities due to differences in healthcare policy.PurposeThe purpose of this research is to examine the epidemiology of NSIs and NSI underreporting, as well as to identify the determinants associated with the occurrence of NSIs and the underreporting of such injuries.MethodA retrospective online survey was conducted from January 15 to January 31, 2022 among healthcare workers (HCWs) across Gansu Province, China.ResultsA total of 7,283 healthcare workers (HCWs) from various institutions participated in this study. After quality assurance checks, 6,464 (88.77%) responses were included in the final analysis. Results revealed a 32.86% self-reported needlestick and sharp injury (NSI) incidence among respondents, with 28.53% of NSIs going unreported. Contrary to common belief, more experienced HCWs exhibited higher rates of both NSIs and underreporting compared to their less experienced peers. The primary reasons cited for NSIs and underreporting were lapses in concentration and not perceiving patients as infectious. Multivariate regression analysis exposes the significant influence of training frequency, occupation, department and years of services on the occurrence of NSIs. Conversely, the reporting of NSIs is primarily influenced by training, reimbursement,occupation, department and hospital grade. Compared to HCWs with no training, those who received ≥3 training sessions per year showed a 12.16% lower NSI incidence (27.12% vs. 39.28%, p < 0.001) and a 55.68% lower underreporting rate (14.61% vs. 70.29%, p < 0.001).ConclusionThere is a pressing need for enhanced surveillance, tailored training programs, and more efficient reporting mechanisms to combat this significant occupational health challenge.

Project description: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.

Dataset Information

Needlestick prevention devices: data from hospital surveillance in Piedmont, Italy-comprehensive analysis on needlestick injuries between healthcare workers after the introduction of safety devices.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Needlestick prevention devices: data from hospital surveillance in Piedmont, Italy-comprehensive analysis on needlestick injuries between healthcare workers after the introduction of safety devices.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets