Performance and impact of disposable and reusable respirators for healthcare workers during pandemic respiratory disease: a rapid evidence review.

OBJECTIVES: To synthesise evidence concerning the range of filtering respirators suitable for patient care and guide the selection and use of different respirator types. DESIGN: Comparative analysis of international standards for respirators and rapid review of their performance and impact in healthcare. DATA SOURCES: Websites of international standards organisations, Medline and Embase, hand-searching of references and citations. STUDY SELECTION: Studies of healthcare workers (including students) using disposable or reusable respirators with a range of designs. We examined respirator performance, clinician adherence and performance, comfort and impact, and perceptions of use. RESULTS: We included standards from eight authorities across Europe, North and South America, Asia and Australasia and 39 research studies. There were four main findings. First, international standards for respirators apply across workplace settings and are broadly comparable across jurisdictions. Second, effective and safe respirator use depends on proper fitting and fit testing. Third, all respirator types carry a burden to the user of discomfort and interference with communication which may limit their safe use over long periods; studies suggest that they have little impact on specific clinical skills in the short term but there is limited evidence on the impact of prolonged wearing. Finally, some clinical activities, particularly chest compressions, reduce the performance of filtering facepiece respirators. CONCLUSION: A wide range of respirator types and models is available for use in patient care during respiratory pandemics. Careful consideration of performance and impact of respirators is needed to maximise protection of healthcare workers and minimise disruption to care.

The impact of extreme reuse and extended wear conditions on protection provided by a surgical-style N95 filtering facepiece respirator.

Most respirators employed in health care settings, and often in first responder and industrial settings, are intended for single-use: the user dons the respirator, performs a work activity, and then doffs and discards the respirator. However, in the current COVID-19 pandemic, in the presence of persistent shortages of personal protective equipment, extended use and reuse of filtering facepiece respirators are routinely contemplated by many health care organizations. Further, there is considerable current effort to understand the effect of sterilization on the possibility of reuse, and some investigations of performance have been conducted. While the ability of such a respirator to continue to provide effective protection after repeated sanitization cycles is a critical component of implementing its reuse, of equal importance is an understanding of the impact that reusing the respirator multiple times in a day while performing work tasks, and even extending its wear over multiple days, has on the workplace protective performance. In this study, we subjected a stockpiled quantitatively fitted surgical style N95 filtering facepiece respirator device to extreme reuse and extended wear conditions (up to 19 uses over a duration of 5 days) and measured its protective performance at regular intervals, including simulated workplace protection factor measurements using total inward leakage. With this respirator, it was shown to be possible to maintain protection corresponding to an assigned protection factor greater than 10 under extreme usage conditions provided an individual is properly trained in the use of, and expertly fitted in, the respirator. Other factors such as hygiene and strap breakage are likely to place limits on reuse.

Pre-Use Ureteroscope Contamination after High Level Disinfection: Reprocessing Effectiveness and the Relation with Cumulative Ureteroscope Use.

PURPOSE: We assessed the frequency of preoperative and persistent microbial contamination of flexible ureteroscopes after reprocessing and the relation of contamination to cumulative ureteroscope use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated the effectiveness of high level disinfection with peracetic acid as well as data on ureteroscope use for 20 new flexible ureteroscopes from December 2015 to December 2017 at a single center. In the operating room pre-use and postuse microbial samples of the ureteroscope shaft and working channel were collected to evaluate microbial contamination after reprocessing. Positive cultures were defined as 30 cfu/ml or greater of skin flora, or 10 cfu/ml or greater of uropathogenic microorganisms. A generalized estimating equation model was used to analyze whether cumulative ureteroscope use was associated with positive pre-use cultures. RESULTS: Microbial samples were collected during 389 procedures. Pre-use ureteroscope cultures were positive in 47 of 389 procedures (12.1%), of which uropathogens were found in 9 of 389 (2.3%) and skin flora in 38 of 389 (9.8%). Urinary tract infection symptoms did not develop in any of the patients who underwent surgery with a uropathogen contaminated ureteroscope. In 1 case the pre-use culture contained the same bacteria type as the prior postuse culture. Cumulative ureteroscope use was not associated with a higher probability of positive cultures. CONCLUSIONS: Microbial contamination of reprocessed ureteroscopes was found in an eighth of all procedures. Notably uropathogenic microorganisms were discovered in a small proportion of all procedures. Persistent ureteroscope contamination with uropathogens was only rarely encountered. Cumulative ureteroscope use was not associated with a higher probability of microbial contamination.

Reprocessing and reuse of single-use medical devices in China: a pilot survey.

BACKGROUND: In China, reprocessing and reuse of single-use medical devices (SUDs) are banned. However, the actual situation has not been reported so far. The study aims to clarify the perceptions and concerns of various sectors of the community on the reuse of SUDs, and whether such practice exists. In addition, we are also wondering how acceptable the respondents are on this matter. METHODS: A cross-sectional study based on a national survey which was conducted on the professional online questionnaire survey platform ( www.wjx.cn ) from July 26 to August 4, 2015. We analyzed the data according to the work fields, sex, age, education level, professional background and participants' answers to 49 other questions. RESULTS: Five hundred forty-four nationwide respondents belong to nine different work fields. In general, participants had positive attitudes towards the reprocessing and reuse of SUDs. However, many respondents doubted the hygienic and functional safety of the reprocessed SUDs. They also tended to think that the reuse of SUDs should have lower prices and more technical training as well as patient advocacy. Further analysis demonstrated the work fields, education level and professional background of respondents were statistically associated with their responses to certain questions. CONCLUSIONS: The research indicated that although the reuse of SUDs is prohibited legally in China, there were extensive reprocessing and reuse in hospitals. Most responses tended to accept reprocessed SUDs if safety and low prices were guaranteed. These existing contradictions and the lack of relevant research led to policy makers in China will confront numerous challenges in building and improving this use system of medical devices to meet escalating demands of social sectors.

Injection practices in 2011-2015: a review using data from the demographic and health surveys (DHS).

BACKGROUND: Reuse of injection devices to give healthcare injections decreased from 39.8 to 5.5% between 2000 and 2010, but trends since 2011 have not been described. We reviewed results of Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) to describe injection practices worldwide from 2011 to 2015. METHODS: We searched the DHS Internet site for data published on injection practices conducted in countries from 2011 to 2015, extracted information on frequency (number of healthcare injections per person in the last 12 months) and safety (proportion of syringes and needles taken from a new, unopened package). We compared gender groups and WHO regions in terms of frequency and safety. For countries with data available, we compared injection practices 2004-2010 and 2011-2015. RESULTS: Since 2011, 40 of 92 countries (43%) that conducted DHS surveys reported on injection practices. On average, the frequency of injection was 1.64 per person per year (from 3.84 in WHO Eastern Mediterranean region to 1.18 in WHO African region). Among those, 96.1% of injections reportedly used new injection devices (from 90.2% in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean region to 98.8% in the WHO Western Pacific region). On average, women received more injections per year (1.85) than men (1.41). Among 16 (40%) countries with data in 2004-2010 and 2011-2015, 69% improved in terms of safety. The annual number of unsafe injections reduced in 81% of countries. In Pakistan, the number of unsafe injections was the highest and did not decrease between 2006 and 2012. CONCLUSIONS: Injection practices have continued to improve in most countries worldwide, although the Eastern Mediterranean region in particular still faces unsafe practices that are not improving. Further efforts are needed to eliminate unsafe injection practices in health care settings, including through the use of reuse-prevention devices. Despite some limitations, DHS is an easily available method to measure progress over time.

Comparing Injecting Risk Behaviors of Long-Term Injectors with New Injectors in Tehran, Iran.

BACKGROUND: Global estimates suggest there are 15.6 million people who inject drugs (PWID) of whom 17.8% are living with HIV.Few studies have characterized newly-onset injectors with long-term injectors and its association with injecting risk behaviors. OBJECTIVES: We examined the relationship between length of injection and risk behaviors among people who inject drugs (PWID) in Tehran, Iran. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among PWID, from March to August 2016 in Tehran, Iran. PWID were recruited by convenience and snowball sampling from five Drop-in Centers (DIC) located in the south of Tehran. Our primary independent variable was length of injecting career, defined as the number of months since injecting initiation. Those defined as new injectors (were injecting for less than 18 months), and long-term injectors (as injecting drugs for more than 18 months). We reported the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) point estimate and 95% confidence interval (CI95%) as the effect measure. The level of significance used in multiple logistic regression model was 0.05. We used STATA v. 11 for all analyzes. RESULTS: The analytical sample comprised of 500 participants (100% male). Mean (±SD) age of PWID with a length of injection history was 31.2 ± 7.2 years. Overall, 270 (54%) (CI95%: 49.6%, 58.4%) of participants were long-term injectors. The average age of drug use initiation among long-term injectors group was lower as compared to new injectors group (31.2 vs. 29.4, p < 0.001). The odds of distributive syringe sharing among new injectors were two times higher than long-term injectors (AOR = 2.1, 95% CI 1.4-4.7). The odds of receptive syringe sharing were lower among new injectors group (AOR = 0.7, CI95% 0.2-0.87), compared to long-term injectors. New injectors had higher odds of reusing their own syringes (OR = 2.8, 95% CI: 1.4-5.7; p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in harm reduction service provision can occur through taregted risk reduction education for new injectors focusing on reducing distributive syringe sharing among them.

Collecting Unused Medical Supplies in Emergency Departments for Responsible Redistribution.

BACKGROUND: Medical supplies and equipment are unevenly distributed throughout the world. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to describe, quantify, and monetize unused supplies suitable for recovery produced from two urban emergency departments (EDs). METHODS: We trained ED staff to place opened, unused, uncontaminated medical supplies in strategically located bins located in two urban EDs for 30 days. We sorted and quantified collected supplies, then used hospital-specific supply catalogs to determine the total cost of recovered medical supplies during the 30-day study period. We extrapolated the amount of collected medical supplies and associated costs to yearly estimates. RESULTS: We recovered 39.9 kg ($6,096) from the trauma center and 3.4 kg ($539) from the academic center during the 30-day study period. The most commonly collected supplies included open but unused procedure kits ($1,776), catheter needles ($1,009), and sutures ($698). We estimated that the trauma center produces $73,158 of unused medical supplies per year and the academic center produces $6,467 of unused medical supplies per year. CONCLUSIONS: We present a novel approach to decreasing waste and recovering usable medical supplies, in which we found that substantial, valuable medical supplies can be recovered in two urban EDs.

A comprehensive literature-based equation to compare cost-effectiveness of a flexible ureteroscopy program with single-use versus reusable devices.

PURPOSE: To critically review all literature concerning the cost-effectiveness of flexible ureteroscopy comparing single-use with reusable scopes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic online literature review was performed in PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar databases. All factors potentially affecting surgical costs or clinical outcomes were considered. Prospective assessments, case control and case series studies were included. RESULTS: 741 studies were found. Of those, 18 were duplicated and 77 were not related to urology procedures. Of the remaining 646 studies, 59 were considered of relevance and selected for further analysis. Stone free and complication rates were similar between single-use and reusable scopes. Operative time was in average 20% shorter with digital scopes, single-use or not. Reusable digital scopes seem to last longer than optic ones, though scope longevity is very variable worldwide. New scopes usually last four times more than refurbished ones and single-use ureterorenoscopes have good resilience throughout long cases. Longer scope longevity is achieved with Cidex and if a dedicated nurse takes care of the sterilization process. The main surgical factors that negatively impact device longevity are lower pole pathologies, large stone burden and non-use of a ureteral access sheath. We have built a comprehensive fi nancial costeffective decision model to fl exible ureteroscope acquisition. CONCLUSIONS: The cost-effectiveness of a fl exible ureteroscopy program is dependent of several aspects. We have developed a equation to allow a literature-based and adaptable decision model to every interested stakeholder. Disposable devices are already a reality and will progressively become the standard as manufacturing price falls.

Hygiene of venepuncture tourniquets in Denmark.

Tourniquets are widely used to make the vein more visible prior to blood collection. Venepuncture tourniquets are however a non-sterile and potentially reusable equipment. Several studies have shown that they are colonised by a variety of pathogenic bacteria and consecutively use of the same tourniquet on multiple patients will increase the risk of a nosocomial infection. This matter is however only scarcely studied. The objective of this study was to investigate the nationwide use of disposable and non-disposable venepuncture tourniquets and the standardised procedures for cleaning the tourniquets. A questionnaire concerning use and cleaning of tourniquets was therefore sent to all major Danish clinical biochemistry laboratories (n = 12). All but one laboratory had a local procedure for usage and handling of tourniquets, including structured procedures for cleaning. Despite this, only 75% of laboratories had a guideline for cleaning the tourniquets and only 50% had a specified cleaning program. At the hospitals using non-disposable tourniquets the handling differed considerably and at two hospitals the tourniquets were only cleaned once a week, while one laboratory did not clean the tourniquet before it was visibly stained. Of note, five of the eight hospitals using disposable tourniquets only disposed the tourniquets on a daily basis. In conclusion, there is a lack of guidelines for handling tourniquets in 25-33% of the hospitals and a number of hospitals used both types (disposable and non-disposable), which could confuse the handling of the tourniquets. A national guideline for usage and cleaning of venepuncture tourniquets is therefore strongly recommended.

Occupational hazards for nursing professionals related to the reuse and single use of the dialyzer. / Riscos ocupacionais para profissionais de enfermagem relacionados ao reúso e uso único do dialisador.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the reports of occupational events recorded by nursing professionals during the periods of reuse and single use of the dialyzer. METHOD: Retrospective longitudinal study with electronic medical records from nursing technicians of a hemodialysis service. Data were analyzed descriptively and Rate ratio. RESULTS: During the reuse of the dialyzer, there were seven events from five professionals reporting musculoskeletal disorders, ocular allergies and dermatosis. During single use, two professionals reported low back pain. The rate ratio of medication use was 6.7 days for every 1000 professionals during the reuse period and 1.52 days in the single use period (RR=4.4; 95% CI 2.182-9.805). Anti-inflammatory drugs were the most prescribed, and sick leaves were similar in both periods. CONCLUSION: Dialyzer reuse was associated with musculoskeletal disorders, ocular irritation, dermatosis and increased use of medications by professionals. Sick leaves were similar on the periods of dialyzer reuse and single use.

Humidifiers for oxygen therapy: what risk for reusable and disposable devices?

INTRODUCTION: Nosocomial pneumonia accounts for the vast majority of healthcare-associated infections (HAI). Although numerous medical devices have been discussed as potential vehicles for microorganisms, very little is known about the role played by oxygen humidifiers as potential sources of nosocomial pathogens. The purpose of this research was to evaluate the safety of the reuse of humidifiers by analysing the rate of microbial contamination in reusable and disposable oxygen humidifiers used during therapy, and then discuss their potential role in the transmission of respiratory pathogens. METHODS: Water samples from reusable and disposable oxygen humidifiers were collected from different wards of the University Hospital of Messina, Italy, where nosocomial pneumonia has a higher incidence rate due to the "critical" clinical conditions of inpatients. In particular, we monitored the Internal Medicine and Pulmonology wards for the medical area; the General Surgery and Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery wards for the surgical area and the Intensive Care Unit and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit for the emergency area. The samples were always collected after a period of 5 days from initial use for both types of humidifiers. Samples were processed using standard bacteriological techniques and microbial colonies were identified using manual and automated methods. RESULTS: High rates of microbial contamination were observed in samples from reusable oxygen humidifiers employed in medical (83%), surgical (77%) and emergency (50%) areas. The most relevant pathogens were Pseudomonas aeruginosa, amongst the Gram-negative bacteria, and Staphylococcus aureus, amongst the Gram-positive bacteria. Other pathogens were detected in lower percentage. The disposable oxygen humidifier samples showed no contamination. CONCLUSIONS: This research presents evidence of the high rate and type of microbial contamination of reusable humidifiers employed for oxygen therapy. These devices may thus be involved in the transmission of potential pathogens. It could be important, for the prevention of nosocomial pneumonia, to replace them with singleuse humidifiers for which the absence of microbial contamination has been confirmed.

Single use versus reuse of endoscopy biopsy forceps: A survey of patient preference.

BACKGROUND: Although there are no confirmatory data on this, we suspect that most endoscopy centres in India reuse single-use ('disposable') endoscopic biopsy forceps due to the cost of these forceps and the perceived low risk of infection transmission on reuse. Low-cost single-use biopsy forceps are now available in India, bringing into question the justification for such a practice. We aimed to determine the type of forceps (single-use or reused) patients would prefer during endoscopy for themselves, whether this is dependent on cost, and what cost would be acceptable to them. METHODS: Among patients (conveniently selected from indoor or outdoor) reporting for endoscopy at the division of gastroenterology at a private tertiary-level hospital, we distributed an information sheet about the survey 30-45 minutes before the procedure. After they completed reading the sheet, an endoscopy nurse and/or doctor explained the study. The patient then completed a questionnaire of multiple choices with tick boxes. RESULTS: Of 151 patients approached, 4 declined to participate. Of 147 patients surveyed (age range 16-83 years; 82 men), 127 (86.4%) preferred single-use forceps, 16 (10.9%) preferred reused forceps, and 4 (2.7%) could not decide and left the decision to the physician. When informed that single-use forceps may be available for about ₹1000 (approximately US$ 15), 131 patients (89.1%) preferred these forceps, 11 (7.4%) preferred reused forceps, and 5 (3.4%) could not decide. Forty-four patients (33.1%) stated that an acceptable cost for a forceps for them would be ₹500 (approximately US$ 8), for 65 patients (48.9%) patients it was ₹1000, and for 24 (18.1%) it was ₹1500. CONCLUSION: About 90% of patients in this survey preferred single-use forceps; a cost of ₹1000 for single-use forceps was acceptable to over two-thirds of them.

[Use of Reusable Textile Undergloves for Medical Procedures: A Feasibility Study]. / Einsatz wiederaufbereitbarer textiler Unterziehhandschuhe für medizinische Tätigkeiten: eine Machbarkeitsstudie.

OBJECTIVE: Undergloves are a way to reduce moisture-related skin damage. The aim of this feasibility study was to gain experience with logistics, applicability, acceptability and cost of the routine use of reusable textile undergloves in a hospital setting. METHODS: Undergloves were tested with 18 health-care workers on an intensive care unit over three months. Data on usage as well as logistics were recorded. At baseline, personal data and knowledge and use of cotton undergloves, existing skin problems and the nursing behaviour of the hands by the subjects were determined by means of an input questionnaire. After each wearing, data on usage were collected by a questionnaire. Participants were interviewed by means of a questionnaire with respect to their experience with the use of the undergloves. RESULTS: Acceptance and compliance with the use of undergloves was remarkably good. This was partly due to the properties of the gloves, and partly to the reduction of sweating and very positive effect on the skin of the hands. In the study period 2165 underglove uses were documented, resulting in an average daily consumption of four pairs per person per day. The average wearing time was 28.6 min. The undergloves were suitable for application as well as reprocessing. Reprocessment-related fatigue was relatively low and did not lead to the loss of the properties, only few gloves had to be sorted out. Even if one assumes a complete write-off of the gloves with end of the study, costs for reprocessing were about 0.46 € or 64 % less than the single use. CONCLUSION: The routine use of textile, reprocessable undergloves is feasible. Major challenges for broad usage are within logistics and acceptance by the user.

[Flexible ureteroscope damages. Evaluation of university hospital service equipment]. / Sinistralité des urétérorénoscopes souples. Évaluation du parc matériel d'un service hospitalier universitaire.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate predictors of flexible ureterorenoscopes breakage and damage of their optical beam. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective survey, single center on 393 interventions with 4 flexible ureterorenoscopes between January 2009 and March 2013. We analyzed factors linked to patient, pathology and surgical technique. RESULTS: We identified 21 major accidents, a breakage rate of 5.34% and 76 pixels losses in the maintenance of endoscopes and 10 during the procedure. The only statistically significant predictor of loss was the cumulative duration of operating time since the last repair (P=0.04, OR=1.001 [1-1001]). For lesions of the optical beam between the procedures, parameters appearing as significant were the ureterorenoscope model (P=0.01, OR=2.558, 95% CI [1229-5326]), the use of instruments by the working channel: the laser (P=0.02, OR=2.06, 95% CI [1109-3827]), or the use of endoluminal graspers (P=0.007, OR=0.467, 95% CI [0269-0809]). Intraoperatively, the number of open or laparoscopic surgery (P=0.007, OR=3.105, 95% CI [1364-7068]), duration of intervention (P=0.01, OR=1.023, 95% CI [1.006-1041]) and the cumulative duration of intervention (P=0.003, OR=1.001, 95% CI [1-1002]) appeared to be statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The only predictor of loss of equipment under repair was the cumulative duration of operation time. It has not been demonstrated any difference between ureterorenoscopes. It was during the endoscopes disinfection that the majority of optical beam lesions take place.

Cardiac implantable electronic device reutilization: battery life of explanted devices at a tertiary care center.

INTRODUCTION: Prior studies have suggested that pacemaker reuse may be a reasonable alternative to provide device therapy in the low- and middle-income countries. We studied explant indications and remaining battery life of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) at a tertiary medical center. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a retrospective review of all CIEDs extracted at the University of Michigan between 2007 and 2011. Devices were considered reusable if battery longevity was ≥48 months or >75% battery life was remaining; there was no evidence of electrical malfunction, and they were not under advisory or recall. Eight hundred and one CIEDs were explanted: Medtronic (MDT [Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA]; 454), Boston Scientific (BS [Boston Scientific Corp., Natick, MA, USA])/Guidant (GDT; 255 [Guidant Corp., St. Paul, MN, USA]), St. Jude Medical (SJM; 73 [St. Paul, MN, USA]), and Biotronik (BTK; 15 [Biotronik GmBH, Berlin, Germany]). After eliminating devices explanted for elective replacement indicator (ERI, 541), 51.9% of pacemakers (41/79), 54.2% of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) (64/118), and 47.6% of cardiac resynchronization therapy and defibrillation (CRT-D) devices (30/63) had sufficient battery life and no evidence of electrical malfunction to be considered for reuse. A logistic regression analysis found that the indications for device removal independently predicted reusability: upgrade to an ICD (odds ratio [OR] 162.8, P < 0.001) or CRT-D (OR 63.8, P < 0.001), infection (OR 110.7, P < 0.001), heart transplantation or left ventricular assist device placement (OR 56.6, P < 0.001), and device removal at patient's request (OR 115.4, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The majority of explanted CIEDs for reasons other than ERI have an adequate battery life and, if proven safe, may conceivably be reutilized for basic pacing in underserved nations where access to this life-saving therapy is limited.

Syringe reuse among people who inject drugs in rural Appalachian Kentucky.

BACKGROUND: Personal syringe reuse (i.e., reuse of one's own syringes) can place people who inject drugs at increased risk for infectious disease but has received relatively little attention in published literature. The purpose of this study is to identify factors associated with syringe reuse among people who inject drugs in rural Kentucky. METHODS: Participants (n = 238) completed interviewer-administered questionnaires on syringe reuse and demographic, behavioral, and service access characteristics. Unadjusted negative binomial regression with cluster-robust standard errors was used to model the associations with a logged offset for number of injections in the past 30 days. RESULTS: The average age of the sample was 35 and 59.7 % were male. Most participants (77.7 %) reused syringes at least once in the past 30 days, using each syringe a median of three times. Reuse was higher among those who were older and reported a higher street price for syringes. Syringe reuse was lower among people who were within walking distance to a syringe service program (SSP) and who obtained most of their syringes from SSPs or pharmacies. CONCLUSION: Syringe reuse among people who inject drugs in rural Kentucky is common. However, these data suggest that increased access to syringes from SSPs and pharmacies, as well as policy-level interventions that reduce street syringe price, might reduce syringe reuse and related harms.

Injection practices among practitioners in private medical clinics of Karachi, Pakistan.

The aim of this study was to determine the frequency and determinants of sharps injuries among private health practitioners in slum areas of Karachi, Pakistan. All practitioners with at least 1 year of experience in a private medical clinic were asked to complete a self-administered, structured questionnaire (317/397 responded). Only 7.9% of practitioners were qualified from medical school, 12.3% were registered nurses and 8.8% lacked any professional qualifications. At least 1 sharps injury in the previous 12 months was reported by 26.7%, mostly due to needle recapping. Only 25.2% reported using a new syringe for each patient. In multivariate regression analysis shorter work experience, < 14 years of schooling, > 20 patients per day, administering > or = 30 injections per day, reuse of syringes and needle recapping after use were significantly associated with sharps injury in the past year. Better awareness and training on standard precautions is needed for private practitioners in slum areas of Karachi.

Adverse staff health outcomes associated with endoscope reprocessing.

There are occupational challenges associated with cleaning, disinfecting, storing, and transporting flexible endoscopes. Although the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has set standards to protect the safety of health workers in the United States, the standards are not specific to endoscope reprocessing, and the general standards that are in place are not fully implemented. Furthermore, adverse staff outcomes may not be fully preventable. To assess the evidence for adverse outcomes in staff associated with endoscope reprocessing, a literature review was performed in the PubMed database for articles on this topic published between Jan. 1, 2007 and March 7, 2012. Eight studies were identified, mainly European, which reported numerous adverse outcomes to healthcare personnel associated with endoscope reprocessing including respiratory ailments and physical discomfort. More scientifically rigorous studies are required to comprehensively describe adverse health outcomes in personnel engaged in reprocessing, particularly in the United States, and examine whether increased automation of the reprocessing process leads to decreased adverse health outcomes for staff.

A life cycle assessment of reusable and single-use central venous catheter insertion kits.

BACKGROUND: For most items used in operating rooms, it is unclear whether reusable items are environmentally and financially advantageous in comparison with single-use variants. We examined the life cycles of reusable and single-use central venous catheter kits used to aid the insertion of single-use, central venous catheters in operating rooms. We did not examine the actual disposable catheter sets themselves. We assessed the entire financial and environmental costs for the kits, including the influence of the energy source used for sterilization. METHODS: For the reusable central venous catheter kit, we performed a "time-in-motion" study to determine the labor costs and measured the energy and water consumption for cleaning and sterilization at Western Health, Melbourne, Australia. For the majority of the inputs for the single-use kit, we relied upon industry and inventory-sourced databases. We modeled the life cycles of the reusable and single-use central venous catheter kits with Monte Carlo analysis. RESULTS: Inclusive of labor, the reusable central venous catheter insertion kits cost $6.35 Australian ($A) (95% confidence interval [CI], $A5.89 to $A6.86), and the single-use kits cost $A8.65. For the reusable kit, CO(2) emissions were 1211 g (95% CI, 1099 to 1323 g) and for the single-use kit 407 g (95% CI, 379 to 442 g). Water use was 27.7 L (95% CI, 27.0 to 28.6 l) for the reusable kit and 2.5 L (95% CI, 2.1 to 2.9 l) for the single-use kit. For the reusable kit, sterilization had the greatest environmental cost, and for the single-use kit, the manufacture of plastic and metal components had the largest environmental costs. Different sources of electricity to make the reusable kits patient-ready again affected the CO(2) emissions: electricity from hospital gas cogeneration resulted in 436 g CO(2) (95% CI, 410 to 473 g CO(2)), from the United States electricity grid 764 g CO(2) (95% CI, 509 to 1174 g CO(2)), and from the European electricity grid 572 g (95% CI, 470 to 713 g CO(2)). CONCLUSIONS: Inclusive of labor, the reusable central venous catheter insertion kits were less expensive than were the single-use kits. For our hospital, which uses brown coal-sourced electricity, the environmental costs of the reusable kit were considerably greater than those of the single-use kit. Efforts to reduce the environmental footprint of reusable items should be directed towards decreasing the water and energy consumed in cleaning and sterilization. The source of hospital electricity significantly alters the relative environmental effects of reusable items.