Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T01:18:45.606Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reported Hospital Needlestick Injuries in Relation to Knowledge/Skill, Design, and Management Problems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2016

Judith Fay Boylan English
Judith Fay Boylan English*
Affiliation:
Infection Control Department, Columbia Hospital for Women Medical Center, Washington, DC
*
Infection Control, Columbia Hospital for Women Medical Center, 2425 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20037
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives:

To investigate reported needlestick injuries in hospital workers from an adult learner theory perspective: identifying safe needle device knowledge and practice, and flaws in needle designs and management practices surrounding such problems.

Design:

Exploratory descriptive study of reported needlestick injuries from hollow needled devices in a hospital. Injured healthcare workers were counseled via hospital protocol, then a survey was filled out containing no identifiers of individual or institution.

Setting:

Seventeen Metropolitan Washington, DC, area hospitals.

Participants:

All workers reporting needlestick injuries during February 1-28, 1990.

Results:

Seventy-two injuries were reported; there were no multiple injuries to any individual. Thirty-three (45.8%) were to registered nurses (RNs)-more than any other group of workers. Recapping accounted for a higher percentage than any other activity (10 sticks, 14.1%). Of workers incurring recapping injuries, 3 identified a knowledge of a one-handed spearing technique and did not practice it; 4 neither knew nor practiced it. Eighteen (25.0%) were to “down-stream” housekeepers and aides who did not use such devices in their practice. Disposable needle/syringes caused 49.3% of injuries; hypodermic needles on intravenous lines caused 16.9%. Of the needlesticks, 60.6% were after use and before disposal, 4.2% occurred as the worker was putting an item into a needlebox, and 9.9% occurred from needles protruding from inappropriate bags. Many injuries occurred in the first 2 hours of work after being off the previous day, on Sunday, and on Monday

Conclusions:

Of nurses and medical technologists reporting knowledge of a spearing recapping technique, 97.3% suffered injury via other methods. This strongly suggests that knowledge leads to different action. Safer needled devices and needle-free systems would make a safer workplace. Further study is indicated to identify if and why the first two hours after returning to work on Sunday or Monday are risky for needlestick injuries. Management practices must ensure compliance to safe practice both by employees and related medical staff.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 13 , Issue 5 , May 1992 , pp. 259 - 264
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Maki, DG. In response to questions raised about June issue. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1989;10:500–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Centers for Disease Control. Guidelines for prevention of transmission of human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis B virus to health-care and public-safety workers, MMWR 1989;38(S-6):1–37.Google Scholar
3. Wormser, GP, Joline, C, Duncanson, F. Needlestick injuries during the care of patients with AIDS. N Engl J Med. 1984;310:1461–1462.Google Scholar
4. Jackson, MM, Lynch, P Education of the adult learner: a practical approach for the infection control practitioner. Am J Infect Control. 1986;14:257–271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Nueberger, JS, Harris, J, Kundin, WD, Bischone, A, Chin, TDY. Incidence of needlestick injuries in hospital personnel: implications for prevention. Am J Infect Control. 1984;12:171–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Sumner, W. Needlecaps to prevent needlestick injuries. Infect Control. 1985;6:495–497.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Garner, JS, Simmons, BP, CDC guideline for isolation precautions in hospitals. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1983;4:245–325.Google ScholarPubMed
8. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Occupational exposure to bloodbome pathogens; final rule. Federal Register 29CFRpart 1910 subpart 2 [amended] #1919.1030(d) (2) (i).Google Scholar