T-SPOT.TB Interferon-γ Release Assay Performance in Healthcare Worker Screening at Nineteen U.S. Hospitals.

RATIONALE: Interferon-γ release assays have significant advantages over tuberculin skin testing in many clinical situations. However, recent studies have called into question their reliability in serial testing of healthcare workers because of reportedly high rates of positivity and high conversion/reversion rates on retesting. OBJECTIVES: To define the performance characteristics of the T-SPOT.TB test, an interferon-γ release assay, during serial screening programs of healthcare workers at 19 U.S. hospitals. METHODS: A total of 42,155 T-SPOT.TB test results from healthcare workers at 19 geographically diverse hospitals obtained for routine tuberculosis screening programs were analyzed to determine the rates of positivity, reversion, and conversion in serial testing data. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In 19,630 evaluable serial pairs from 16,076 healthcare workers, the mean test positivity rate was 2.3% (range, 0.0-27.4%). The mean conversion rate was 0.8% (range, 0.0-2.5%), and the mean reversion rate was 17.6%. Positivity and conversion rates correlated with known tuberculosis risk factors including age and sex. The observed specificity of the T-SPOT.TB test was at least 98.6%. CONCLUSIONS: The high concordance and test completion rates in this study suggest that the T-SPOT.TB test is a reliable tool for healthcare worker serial screening. As expected, the observed positivity rates were lower compared with the tuberculin skin test, likely reflecting the higher specificity of this test. Furthermore, the observed rates of conversion were low and significantly correlated with the geographic incidence of tuberculosis. Our findings suggest that the T-SPOT.TB test is an accurate and reliable way to screen healthcare workers.

Understanding patient-to-worker violence in hospitals: a qualitative analysis of documented incident reports.

AIM: To explore catalysts to, and circumstances surrounding, patient-to-worker violent incidents recorded by employees in a hospital system database. BACKGROUND: Violence by patients towards healthcare workers (Type II workplace violence) is a significant occupational hazard in hospitals worldwide. Studies to date have failed to investigate its root causes due to a lack of empirical research based on documented episodes of patient violence. DESIGN: Qualitative content analysis. METHODS: Content analysis was conducted on the total sample of 214 Type II incidents documented in 2011 by employees of an American hospital system with a centralized reporting system. FINDINGS: The majority of incidents were reported by nurses (39·8%), security staff (15·9%) and nurse assistants (14·4%). Three distinct themes were identified from the analysis: Patient Behaviour, Patient Care and Situational Events. Specific causes of violence related to Patient Behaviour were cognitive impairment and demanding to leave. Catalysts related to patient care were the use of needles, patient pain/discomfort and physical transfers of patients. Situational factors included the use/presence of restraints; transitions in the care process; intervening to protect patients and/or staff; and redirecting patients. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying catalysts and situations involved in patient violence in hospitals informs administrators about potential targets for intervention. Hospital staff can be trained to recognize these specific risk factors for patient violence and can be educated in how to best mitigate or prevent the most common forms of violent behaviour. A social-ecological model can be adapted to the hospital setting as a framework for prevention of patient violence towards staff.

Catalysts of worker-to-worker violence and incivility in hospitals.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To identify common catalysts of worker-to-worker violence and incivility in hospital settings. BACKGROUND: Worker-to-worker violence and incivility are prevalent forms of mistreatment in healthcare workplaces. These are forms of counterproductive work behaviour that can lead to negative outcomes for employees, patients and the organisation overall. Identifying the factors that lead to co-worker mistreatment is a critical first step in the development of interventions targeting these behaviours. DESIGN: Retrospective descriptive study. METHODS: Qualitative content analysis was conducted on the total sample (n = 141) of employee incident reports of worker-to-worker violence and incivility that were documented in 2011 at a large American hospital system. RESULTS: More than 50% of the incidents involved nurses, and the majority of incidents did not involve physical violence. Two primary themes emerged from the analysis: Work Behaviour and Work Organisation. Incidents in the Work Behaviour category were often sparked by unprofessional behaviour, disagreement over responsibilities for work tasks or methods of patient care, and dissatisfaction with a co-worker's performance. Incidents in the Work Organisation category involved conflicts or aggression arising from failure to following protocol, patient assignments, limited resources and high workload. CONCLUSION: Incidents of worker-to-worker violence and incivility stemmed from dissatisfaction with employee behaviour or from organisational practices or work constraints. These incident descriptions reflect worker dissatisfaction and frustration, resulting from poor communication and collaboration between employees, all of which threaten work productivity. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Violence and incivility between hospital employees can contribute to turnover of top performers, hinder effective teamwork and jeopardise the quality of patient care. Identification of common catalysts for worker-to-worker violence and incivility informs the development of mistreatment prevention programmes that can be used to educate hospital staff.

Application and implementation of the hazard risk matrix to identify hospital workplaces at risk for violence.

BACKGROUND: A key barrier to preventing workplace violence injury is the lack of methodology for prioritizing the allocation of limited prevention resources. The hazard risk matrix was used to categorize the probability and severity of violence in hospitals to enable prioritization of units for safety intervention. METHODS: Probability of violence was based on violence incidence rates; severity was based on lost time management claims for violence-related injuries. Cells of the hazard risk matrix were populated with hospital units categorized as low, medium, or high probability and severity. Hospital stakeholders reviewed the matrix after categorization to address the possible confounding of underreporting. RESULTS: Forty-one hospital units were categorized as medium or high on both severity and probability and were prioritized for forthcoming interventions. Probability and severity were highest in psychiatric care units. CONCLUSIONS: This risk analysis tool may be useful for hospital administrators in prioritizing units for violence injury prevention efforts.

Development and application of a population-based system for workplace violence surveillance in hospitals.

BACKGROUND: A unique and comprehensive reporting and population-based violence surveillance system in a multi-site hospital system is presented. METHODS: Incidence rates and rate ratios (RR) were calculated by year, hospital, violence type, and job category in six hospitals, 2003-2008. RESULTS: Incidence rates per hospital for the 6-year period ranged from a low of 1.52 to a high of 10.89 incidents/100 full-time equivalents (FTEs), with the highest risk at a hospital with an outpatient mental health facility (RR = 7.16, 95%CI = 5.17-10.26). Rates for worker-on-worker violence exceeded rates for patient-to-worker violence from 2004 to 2008. Mental health technicians (RR = 13.82, 95%CI = 1.13-17.29) and security personnel (RR = 2.25, CI = 1.68-3.00) were at greatest risk for violence. CONCLUSIONS: This surveillance system provides ongoing information on professional groups and hospital departments at risk and trends in violence reporting over time. It can be used to determine where appropriate violence prevention efforts are most needed, and to evaluate violence interventions.

Worker-on-worker violence among hospital employees.

Violence toward hospital workers is an internationally recognized occupational hazard. While patients are frequently perpetrators of physical violence, other employees are often responsible for acts of nonphysical violence. However, few hospitals have systems for documenting and monitoring worker-on-worker violence. This study encompassed all incidents of worker-on-worker violence recorded by employees in a hospital system database over a six-year period. Incidence rates per 100 full-time equivalents (FTEs) and rate ratios (RR) were calculated by year, hospital, and job category. The majority (87%) of worker-on-worker incidents involved nonphysical conflict. The overall incidence rate was 1.65/100 FTEs, ranging among the six hospitals from 0.54 to 3.42/100 FTEs. Based on multivariate analysis, no single professional group was at increased risk for worker-on-worker violence. Co-worker violence threatens the well-being of hospital employees and should be regularly tracked with other forms of workplace violence so that suitable intervention programs can be implemented and assessed.

Practices and Attitudes of Michigan-Based Occupational Physicians Regarding Adult Immunization.

OBJECTIVE: To assess practices and barriers regarding adult immunizations, among occupational and environmental physicians in Michigan. METHODS: A 10-item multiple choice web based questionnaire was designed after reviewing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations and the current literature on adult immunization standards. RESULTS: Assessing immunization status is common practice for 62% of respondents. 92% of respondents recommend the annual influenza vaccination, unless contraindicated. The most commonly reported barriers included the cost of providing immunizations and the prioritization of acute over preventative care. Use of standing order vaccinations and reminder-recall systems were popular strategies used to improve vaccination rates. CONCLUSIONS: Occupational physicians frequently recommend influenza, tetanus, and hepatitis B vaccines when indicated, but are less likely to order other vaccines for patients. Promotion of a more comprehensive assessment of immunity needs in the workplace may improve national vaccine coverage.

Worksite Walkthrough Intervention: Data-driven Prevention of Workplace Violence on Hospital Units.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the implementation of a data-driven, unit-based walkthrough intervention shown to be effective in reducing the risk of workplace violence in hospitals. METHODS: A structured worksite walkthrough was conducted on 21 hospital units. Unit-level workplace violence data were reviewed and a checklist of possible prevention strategies and an Action Plan form guided development of unit-specific intervention. Unit supervisor perceptions of the walkthrough and implemented prevention strategies were reported via questionnaires. Prevention strategies were categorized as environmental, behavioral, or administrative. RESULTS: A majority of units implemented strategies within 12 months' postintervention. Participants found the walkthrough useful, practical, and worthy of continued use. CONCLUSIONS: Structured worksite walkthroughs provide a feasible method for workplace violence reduction in hospitals. Core elements are standardized yet flexible, promoting fidelity and transferability of this intervention.

Preventing Patient-to-Worker Violence in Hospitals: Outcome of a Randomized Controlled Intervention.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of a randomized controlled intervention on the incidence of patient-to-worker (Type II) violence and related injury in hospitals. METHODS: Forty-one units across seven hospitals were randomized into intervention (n = 21) and control (n = 20) groups. Intervention units received unit-level violence data to facilitate development of an action plan for violence prevention; no data were presented to control units. Main outcomes were rates of violent events and injuries across study groups over time. RESULTS: Six months post-intervention, incident rate ratios of violent events were significantly lower on intervention units compared with controls (incident rate ratio [IRR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29 to 0.80). At 24 months, the risk for violence-related injury was lower on intervention units, compared with controls (IRR 0.37, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: This data-driven, worksite-based intervention was effective in decreasing risks of patient-to-worker violence and related injury.

Management Commitment to Safety, Teamwork, and Hospital Worker Injuries.

Although many studies link teamwork in health care settings to patient safety, evidence linking teamwork to hospital worker safety is lacking. This study addresses this gap by providing evidence linking teamwork perceptions in hospital workers to worker injuries, and further, finds a linkage between manager commitment to safety and teamwork. Organizational records of worker injuries and survey responses regarding management commitment to safety and teamwork from 446 hospital workers within 42 work units in a multi-site hospital system were examined. Results underscored the particular importance of teamwork on worker injuries as well as the importance of management commitment to safety as relating to teamwork. To improve worker safety, organizational leaders and unit managers should work to maintain environments wherein teamwork can thrive.

Worker-to-Worker Violence in Hospitals: Perpetrator Characteristics and Common Dyads.

Worker-to-worker (Type III) violence is prevalent in health care settings and has potential adverse consequences for employees and organizations. Little research has examined perpetrator characteristics of this type of violence. The current study is a descriptive examination of the common demographic and work-related characteristics of perpetrators of Type III workplace violence among hospital workers. Analysis was based on documented incidents of Type III violence reported within a large hospital system from 2010 to 2012. Nurses were involved as either the perpetrator or target in the five most common perpetrator-target dyads. Incidence rate ratios revealed that patient care associates and nurses were significantly more likely to be perpetrators than other job titles. By examining characteristics of perpetrators and common worker dyads involved in Type III workplace violence, hospital stakeholders and unit supervisors have a starting point to develop strategies for reducing conflict between workers.

Using database reports to reduce workplace violence: Perceptions of hospital stakeholders.

BACKGROUND: Documented incidents of violence provide the foundation for any workplace violence prevention program. However, no published research to date has examined stakeholders' preferences for workplace violence data reports in healthcare settings. If relevant data are not readily available and effectively summarized and presented, the likelihood is low that they will be utilized by stakeholders in targeted efforts to reduce violence. OBJECTIVE: To discover and describe hospital system stakeholders' perceptions of database-generated workplace violence data reports. PARTICIPANTS: Eight hospital system stakeholders representing Human Resources, Security, Occupational Health Services, Quality and Safety, and Labor in a large, metropolitan hospital system. METHODS: The hospital system utilizes a central database for reporting adverse workplace events, including incidents of violence. A focus group was conducted to identify stakeholders' preferences and specifications for standardized, computerized reports of workplace violence data to be generated by the central database. The discussion was audio-taped, transcribed verbatim, processed as text, and analyzed using stepwise content analysis. RESULTS: Five distinct themes emerged from participant responses: Concerns, Etiology, Customization, Use, and Outcomes. In general, stakeholders wanted data reports to provide ``the big picture,'' i.e., rates of occurrence; reasons for and details regarding incident occurrence; consequences for the individual employee and/or the workplace; and organizational efforts that were employed to deal with the incident. CONCLUSIONS: Exploring stakeholder views regarding workplace violence summary reports provided concrete information on the preferred content, format, and use of workplace violence data. Participants desired both epidemiological and incident-specific data in order to better understand and work to prevent the workplace violence occurring in their hospital system.

Underreporting of Workplace Violence: Comparison of Self-Report and Actual Documentation of Hospital Incidents.

This study examined differences between self-report and actual documentation of workplace violence (WPV) incidents in a cohort of health care workers. The study was conducted in an American hospital system with a central electronic database for reporting WPV events. In 2013, employees (n = 2010) were surveyed by mail about their experience of WPV in the previous year. Survey responses were compared with actual events entered into the electronic system. Of questionnaire respondents who self-reported a violent event in the past year, 88% had not documented an incident in the electronic system. However, more than 45% had reported violence informally, for example, to their supervisors. The researchers found that if employees were injured or lost time from work, they were more likely to formally report a violent event. Understanding the magnitude of underreporting and characteristics of health care workers who are less likely to report may assist hospitals in determining where to focus violence education and prevention efforts.

Marijuana in the Workplace: Guidance for Occupational Health Professionals and Employers: Joint Guidance Statement of the American Association of Occupational Health Nurses and the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

Employers are often put in a difficult position trying to accommodate state laws that allow the use of marijuana for medical purposes while enforcing federal rules or company drug-use policies based on federal law. To ensure workplace safety as well as compliance with state and federal legislation, employers should review state laws on discrimination against marijuana users and ensure that policies enacted are consistent with the state's antidiscrimination statutes. Although it appears that in most states that allow medical marijuana use, employers can continue enforcing policies banning or restricting the use of marijuana, this approach may change on the basis of future court decisions. The Joint Task Force recommends that marijuana use be closely monitored for all employees in safety-sensitive positions, whether or not covered by federal drug-testing regulations. Best practice would support employers prohibiting marijuana use at work. Employers, in compliance with applicable state laws, may choose to simply prohibit their employees from working while using or impaired by marijuana. In some states, employers may choose to prohibit marijuana use by all members of their workforce whether on or off duty. Nevertheless, in all cases, a clear policy to guide decisions on when marijuana use is allowed and how to evaluate for impairment must be widely distributed and carefully explained to all workers. Legal consultation during policy development and continual review is imperative to ensure compliance with federal, state, and case law. Drug-use and drug-testing policies should clearly delineate expectations regarding on-the-job impairment and marijuana use outside of work hours. Specific criteria for use by supervisors and HR personnel when referring employees suspected of impairment for an evaluation by a qualified occupational health professional are critical. Detailed actions based on the medical evaluation results must also be clearly delineated for HRs, supervisors, and workers. The Joint Task Force recommends that employers review the following points when developing workplace policies that address marijuana use in the workplace: 1. For employees covered by federal drug testing regulations (eg, DOT and other workers under federal contract), marijuana use, both on or off the job, is prohibited. Thus, employers may use urine drug screening in this population. 2. Employees in safety-sensitive positions must not be impaired at work by any substance, whether it be illicit, legally prescribed, or available over-the-counter. Employers may consider prohibiting on the job marijuana use for all employees in safety-sensitive positions, even when not covered by federal drug testing regulations. Nevertheless, legal review of the employer's policy in the context of state statutes is strongly encouraged. When employers allow medical marijuana use by employees, consultation with a qualified occupational health professional is recommended. 3. Employers residing in or near states that allow the use of recreational marijuana must establish a policy regarding off-work use of marijuana. In many states, the employer may choose to prohibit employees from simply working while using or under the influence of marijuana or may choose to prohibit marijuana use both on and off the job. Urine drug testing above traditional cutoff levels, or serum testing at any level, would be reasonable criteria for the employer wishing to ban both on- and off-the-job use. To detect impairment, a limit of 5 ng/mL of THC measured in serum or plasma as THC (or possibly the sum of THC plus THC-OH for employers who choose to evaluate both psychoactive components) would meet the goal of identifying individuals most likely to be impaired. Nevertheless, employers using the 5 ng/ml level need to understand the limitations of using a single number to fit all cases; therefore, a medical examination focused on identifying impairment is always recommended. Legal consultation is strongly recommended. 4. Although it appears that in most states that allow the use of medical marijuana, employers may be able to continue policies banning or restricting the use of marijuana as previously discussed, this practice may change on the basis of future case law. Currently the ADA does not apply in these situations because marijuana is illegal under federal law. Legal consultation is again strongly recommended. 5. Most workers' compensation statutes allow reduced benefits when a worker is under the influence of alcohol or illegal drugs. Two samples should usually be obtained as a second confirmatory test may be needed. Proof of use and/or impairment is usually required for these cases, and a positive urine drug test (for the inactive metabolite) does not prove acute impairment. The serum level of less than 5 ng/mL could be used for presumptive evidence of impairment in these situations. An MRO is most helpful in helping determine these types of cases because legal testimony may be required. 6. All employers should have clear policies and procedures for supervisors to follow regarding the criteria for identifying potential impairment and the process for referring an employee suspected of impairment for an occupational medical evaluation. Policies should include action required by HR personnel based on the results of the examination. 7. Employee education is vital to ensure compliance with company expectations. Education is needed at hire and again at regular intervals. Workers must know the company's chemical substance policy and management's expectations for adherence. The employer's commitment to a drug-free workplace and existing company policy will influence the education program's content. At a minimum, employees should learn how chemical substances affect their health, safety, personal behavior, and job performance. Supervisors and employees should also be educated about how to recognize behaviors indicative of impairment, whether the source is medical marijuana, prescription medications, illegal drugs, alcohol, over-the-counter medications, fatigue, or any combination thereof. 8. In states where marijuana use is permitted, employers should provide educational resources regarding the detrimental effects of marijuana use, including caution regarding dose and delayed effects of edible products. This information may be obtained from SAMHSA and state governmental agencies. The safety of workers and the public must be central to all workplace policies and employers must clearly articulate that legalization of marijuana for recreational or medical use does not negate workplace policies for safe job performance. The evolving legal situation on medical and recreational marijuana requires employers to consult with legal experts to craft company policy and clarify implications of impaired on-duty workers. This changing environment surrounding marijuana use requires close collaboration between employers, occupational health professionals, and legal experts to ensure that workplace safety is not compromised.

Understanding health care personnel's attitudes toward mandatory influenza vaccination.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the factors influencing influenza vaccination rates among health care personnel (HCP) and explored HCP's attitudes toward a policy of mandatory vaccination. METHODS: In September 2012, a 33-item Web-based questionnaire was administered to 3,054 HCP employed at a tertiary care hospital in metropolitan Detroit. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in the rate of influenza vaccination, from 80% in the 2010-2011 influenza season (before the mandated influenza vaccine) to 93% in 2011-2012 (after the mandate) (P < .0001). Logistic regression showed that HCP with a history of previous influenza vaccination were 7 times more likely than their peers without this history to receive the vaccine in 2011-2012. A pro-mandate attitude toward influenza vaccination was a significant predictor of receiving the vaccine after adjusting for demographics, history of previous vaccination, awareness of the hospital's mandatory vaccination policy, and patient contact while providing care (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: The increased rate of influenza vaccination among HCP was driven by both an awareness of the mandatory policy and a pro-mandate attitude toward vaccination. The findings of this study call for better education of HCP on the influenza vaccine along with enforcement of a mandatory vaccination policy.