Combatting the occurrence of needle-stick injuries in a medical school: why is it still an issue?

BACKGROUND: Needle-stick injuries (NSIs) pose a safety risk for healthcare workers with great potential for serious infections. The aim was to determine numbers and causes of NSIs as well as the frequency with which medical students report NSIs in the final stages of study. METHODS: An online questionnaire was developed and made available in January and February 2023 to all undergraduate medical students (n = 423) in the last 1.5 years of their degree course at Würzburg University, Germany. RESULTS: The response rate was 19.6% (n = 84). Among respondents, 27.4% (n = 23) reported at least one NSI. Occurrence was particularly frequent in surgery, obstetrics and gynaecology, and internal medicine. Assisting with procedures, suturing, and blood sampling were considered high-risk activities. Lack of concentration, distraction, and time pressure played a role in incidents. Respondents did not report 18.8% of NSIs with the main reasons being fear of the consequences, self-assessment of the injury as minor, or the opinion of supervisors that reporting was unnecessary. Students with previous practice on simulators or patients were significantly more likely to suffer NSIs. Instructions from occupational health specialists beforehand correlated with fewer NSIs. CONCLUSION: We assume that trained students are more experienced in handling invasive procedures, leading to a greater adoption of corresponding activities and thus an increased risk of injuries in absolute numbers. This does not counter the need for didactic interventions prior to workplace-based training to raise awareness of NSI risks. Simultaneously, concepts must be developed and implemented to support reporting and alleviate fears regarding consequences.

A simple technical innovation to prevent needle stick injuries among dental professionals.

OBJECTIVE: Dental healthcare personnel face the potential danger of being exposed to infectious patients while administering local anesthesia injections during dental operations. This could lead to unintentional transfer of infectious diseases from patients to physicians. Although safety measures such as the One-hand-scoop technique and the use of safety syringes, plastic needle cap holders, and needles with safety caps are in place, there have been instances of needle stick injuries reported in clinics. This might be due to the lack of adherence to conventional safety measures or the impracticality of safety techniques and safety syringes. This article aims to demonstrate the utilization of dental tweezers, specifically London College tweezers or dental forceps, for the secure recapping of needles, eliminating the requirement for extra equipment or devices. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: After obtaining ethical approval (Approval No.: 024-01-2024) from the College of Dentistry, Dar Al Uloom University, 67 dental professionals, with consent for participation in the study, were included. They were requested to use dental tweezers/London College tweezers and dental extraction forceps such as maxillary anterior, mandibular anterior, and maxillary bayonet root forceps individually to recap the local anesthetic needles. The efficacy of these techniques was evaluated against the one-hand scoop technique for its ease, convenience, and reliability in preventing needle stick injuries. RESULTS: The evaluation of dental professionals regarding the ease of using dental tweezers to recap needles, compared to the one-hand scoop technique (p=0.592), maxillary bayonet root forceps (p=0.746), mandibular anterior forceps (p=0.380), and maxillary anterior forceps (p=0.808), did not yield statistically significant results. The assessment of the procedural simplicity of the one-hand scoop technique showed a satisfaction rate of over 40%, whereas the application of dental tweezers resulted in a satisfaction rate of 30%. However, the use of dental tweezers for needle recapping resulted in a satisfaction rate of over 50%, compared to a satisfaction rate of 30% for the one-handed scoop technique. CONCLUSIONS: There is no statistically significant difference in the assessment of the efficacy of dental tweezers and the one-hand scoop technique, bayonet root forceps, mandibular anterior forceps, maxillary anterior forceps, and dental tweezers for the needle capping technique. Therefore, dental forceps can be used instead of the one-handed scoop approach. The needle recapping procedure outlined in our study, aimed at preventing needle stick injuries, is simple to implement, and all dental specialties have convenient access to the required instruments.

Needle Stick Injury: A Decade Retrospection Among Health Care Workers in a Tertiary Care Center.

Needle stick injury (NSI) is a common incidence in a health care facility which can have a great impact on the psychological status of a health care worker (HCW). In the present study, over a decade, 76 incidents of NSI were reported. Nurses (47.3%) were at high risk followed by doctors (28.94%). Recapping (30.2%) was the major activity associated with NSI. Percutaneous injury (97.3%) with a hollow bore needle to the fingers was the most common type of injury. Three (3.9%) of the sources were positive for Hepatitis B virus (HBV), and one (1.3%) for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Postexposure prophylaxis was administered to eight (10.5%) HCWs with high-risk exposure. The incidence of NSI is low, as there exists an underreporting which cannot be denied. Following stringent universal precautions and adoption of safety-guided devices can reduce the rate of injury to a great extent. Regular training, monitoring, auditing, and adequate control modalities are the core strategies to reduce the incidence of NSI.

Bloodborne viral infections: Seroprevalence and relevance of preoperative screening in Indian eye care system - A retrospective study.

PURPOSE: To report the seroprevalence of bloodborne viral infection (BBVI) in patients undergoing ophthalmic surgeries and assess the utility and feasibility of preoperative screening for BBVI in India's current eye care system. METHODS: This retrospective, hospital-based, descriptive study included data from patients undergoing preoperative screening for Hepatitis B virus (HBV), Hepatitis C virus (HCV), and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) at a tertiary eye care institute from 2018 to 2022. Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) were performed on the blood samples after obtaining informed consent from the patients. Seroreactive patients underwent surgery with additional safety precautions. The demographic data and surgical details of these patients were collected and analyzed. ANOVA was used to carry out statistical analysis between groups. During the study period, the number of healthcare workers (HCWs) sustaining needle stick injury (NSI) and accidental sharp injury (ASI) in the operating theater (OT) and details of these injuries were recorded. RESULTS: Samples from 28,563 patients were included. The seroprevalence of BBVI was 1.87% (536/28563). Hepatitis B virus (322, 60.1%) was the most commonly detected infection, and HIV (59, 11%) was the least detected infection. The mean age of the seroreactive patients was 60.3 ± 30.8 years. The incidence of NSI was 0.49/1000 surgeries. Nurses (11) and technicians (4) in the OT sustained maximum NSI. None of the HCWs had seroconversion after NSI. CONCLUSION: The overall seroprevalence of BBVI in the current study is lower than that reported in previously published studies from eye care organizations. Currently, mandatory preoperative screening for BBVI to prevent transmission of these infections to HCWs working in the eye care sector in India appears to be less cost-effective.

A large-scale survey on epidemiology and underreporting of needlestick and sharp injuries among healthcare workers in China.

Background: Needlestick 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. Purpose: The 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. Method: A retrospective online survey was conducted from January 15 to January 31, 2022 among healthcare workers (HCWs) across Gansu Province, China. Results: A 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). Conclusion: There is a pressing need for enhanced surveillance, tailored training programs, and more efficient reporting mechanisms to combat this significant occupational health challenge.

Occupational protection behavior and its influencing factors of newly recruited nurses.

AIM: Aim The objective of this study was to understand the occupational protective behaviors of newly recruited nurses and explore the influencing factors. METHODS: A convenience sampling method was used to select newly recruited nurses in our hospital from July 2018 to November 2019. The survey was conducted using the general information questionnaire, work attitude scale (Wa), and occupational protective behavior scale. RESULTS: The total score of occupational protective behaviors of 150 newly enrolled nurses was 18.94 ± 3.59. There was a significant negative correlation between work attitude score and occupational protective behaviors (r = -0.324, p < 0.001). Multiple linear regression analysis showed that gender, previous participation in nursing skill-based competitions, experience of needlestick injuries before recruit, work attitude score, average daily sleep time (p < 0.05) were independent factors influencing occupational protective behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: The overall occupational protective awareness of newly enrolled nurses is relatively weak and needs to be further improved. The group's ability to improve occupational protective behaviors may be positively impacted through increased adaptability, improved sleep, active participation in nursing skill-based competitions, strengthening guidance and education on occupational protection.

Direct Care Nurses' Needlestick Injury Experiences: A Qualitative Descriptive Study.

BACKGROUND: Even when education and the use of safety equipment are emphasized, nurses frequently experience needlestick injuries. Understanding the risk situations and coping mechanisms for needlestick injuries experienced by nurses facilitates their prevention. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to explore and describe the phenomenon of needlestick injuries through the research questions: (1) What causes nurses to suffer from needlestick injuries? (2) How to cope after a needlestick injury? and (3) What are the recommendations for needlestick injury prevention? METHODS: This qualitative descriptive study involved focus group interviews with 31 direct care nurses in 6 groups who had experienced needlestick injuries while working in different acute care hospitals across 3 regions in South Korea. Data were collected from January 29 to March 29, 2022, and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The average age of the participating nurses was 29.7 years. The following 3 themes were identified: various needlestick injury experiences, post-needlestick injury coping, and expectations regarding needlestick injuries. CONCLUSIONS: Risk situations and coping mechanisms of nurses who experienced needlestick injuries were diverse. Emergency situations and novice nurses were the causes of most of the needlestick injuries. Often, personal protective equipment was found cumbersome. Reporting needlestick injuries depended on the work environment.

Needlestick injuries in dentistry: Time to revisit.

BACKGROUND: Blood-borne pathogens (BBPs) are infectious microorganisms that are found in human blood and can cause diseases in humans. Health care workers such as physicians, surgeons, nurses, dentists, dental students, dental assistants, laboratory technicians, personnel handling infectious waste, and other health care employees are at increased risk of exposure to these pathogens. Percutaneous injuries from needles or other sharp objects are the major sources of BBPs in the workplace. Needlestick injuries (NSIs) have the most potential to transmit and have the easiest mode of transmission of BBPs. TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: The authors searched electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scopus, Embase, MEDLINE-Ovid) for studies and articles focused on the various aspects of NSIs, their possible causes, prevention, and management protocols. RESULTS: There is a lack of literature on the global prevalence of NSIs among dental practitioners and underreporting of NSIs by clinicians. The authors also found that dental students and inexperienced practitioners were the most vulnerable. They found apparent inconsistencies in guidelines and recommendations from various regulatory and statutory agencies in charge of limiting and managing NSIs. CONCLUSION: The most significant occupational risks for health care workers globally are NSIs. Dentists are recognized as one of the high-risk groups for exposure to NSIs. Although the reporting rate was noticeably low, the frequency of NSIs among dental students was alarmingly high. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Appropriate and succinct training of dental health care workers is crucial for prevention and management of NSIs. It is recommended that dentists familiarize themselves with recommendations from such agencies and organizations as the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and American Dental Association.

A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Sharps Injuries Among Dermatologic Surgeons: A Survey of American College of Mohs Surgery Members.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data on sharps injuries and bloodborne pathogen exposure among Dermatologic Surgeons. OBJECTIVE: Quantify occupational risks from sharps injuries among Mohs surgeons. Determine rate of injury, reporting, and confidence in staff's sharps handling. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis performed using survey responses from Mohs surgeons with membership in the American College of Mohs Surgery (ACMS). RESULTS: A total of 60 ACMS members completed the survey. Overall, 56.7% reported at least 1 sharps injury within the past year, of which 14.7% resulted in a bloodborne exposure (odds of exposure: 7.5% per year). The most common type of injury was self-inflicted suture needlestick (76.5%). Forty-four-point-one percent did not report their injuries. Ninety-five percent reported access to postexposure prophylaxis at their workplace. In addition, respondents in academic and single-specialty practices were more likely to report high or moderate confidence in staff sharps handling knowledge and in injury reporting compared with respondents from multispecialty and solo practices (88% vs 54% p = .02, 76%-81% vs 27% p = .0004, respectively). CONCLUSION: Sharps injuries and under-reporting of these injuries are common among Mohs surgeons. Despite reporting of higher confidence in staff knowledge and training in academic and single-specialty practices, there was no correlation with surgeon's rate of injury.

Assessment of sharps penetrating injury, mucosal exposure and compliance with standard precautions of health workers at a University Hospital in Turkey.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the compliance with standard precautions in healthcare workers who experienced a sharps penetrating injury or mucosal exposure using the compliance with Standard Precautions Scale, Turkish version. METHODS: This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted in a tertiary hospital. The occupational health and safety unit records of healthcare workers who were injured by a sharps penetrating injury or experienced mucosal exposure between January 2018 and July 2020 were examined. Compliance with the Standard Precautions Scale was assessed by having participants answer a questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the 100 participants, 59% were men. Of all healthcare workers in the university hospital, 4.5% (n=100) were injured by sharps penetrating injuries or mucosal exposure. Of the participants, 95% were wounded by a sharps penetrating injury and 5% had mucosal exposure. The mean Compliance with Standard Precautions Scale score of participants with a sharps penetrating injury was 16.36±2.39 and with mucosal exposure was 16.80±3.03. There was no significant difference between the mean Compliance with Standard Precautions Scale scores of the sharps penetrating injury and mucosal exposure groups regardless of training on occupational health and safety (p=0.794). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the frequency of a sharps penetrating injury and mucosal exposure in healthcare workers was similar to the literature. The compliance level of the healthcare workers measured with the Compliance with Standard Precautions Scale was high.

Training on the Incidence of Needle Injury and Preventive Measures for Fitness Nurses at Different Stages of Clinical Practice

Medical training for fitness nurses accommodates theoretical and practical sessions for understanding real-time patient care and handling. Some common errors such as needle injury, improper tool handling, etc. occur due to novice fitness nursing students. For preventing such errors and improving the training quality, this article introduces an Artificial Intelligence assimilated Preventive Training Measure (AI-PTM). The proposed method observes the different training sessions of fitness nursing students for error detection and training qualification. In this method, classification with recurrent learning is induced for identifying the error-causing feature in the mid of the training session. This error-causing feature is classified based on student characteristics (such as mishandling, lack of concentration, etc.) and objects (new equipment, precision handling, etc.). Based on the classification, the instance is modified in the recurrent training session, improving the student’s concentration. The identified error-causing features are stored, congruently matched, and used for training further nursing sessions. This method improves training accuracy, and precision handling, and reduces error. (AU)

Sharps injuries with Lovenox and generic enoxaparin prefilled safety syringes: A 12-year retrospective cross-sectional analytical study.

PURPOSE: Investigate the incidence and mechanisms of sharps injuries (SI) to staff using Lovenox and generic enoxaparin prefilled syringes. METHODS: Four national adverse event databases were examined over a 12-year period for incidence and brands involved with injury events to staff using enoxaparin prefilled syringes. RESULTS: The search revealed 581 adverse events (including 20 sharps injuries) associated with device malfunction in 8 of 16 brands, with one brand mentioned significantly more frequently than others. No national alert had been issued. CONCLUSIONS: Use of certain brands of enoxaparin prefilled syringes poses a small but serious risk of injury to staff. Conducting root cause analyses on all SI is essential, as is the need for regularly evaluating safer devices, reporting all device incidents, enabling simpler reporting of adverse events, and establishing more effective intervention by FDA and manufacturers.

Impact of patient safety climate on infection prevention practices and healthcare worker and patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Standard precautions may prevent patient health care associated infections and provider occupational exposures but are not often used by health care workers. A positive patient safety climate might contribute to improved adherence. The aim of this study was to determine the relationships among patient safety climate, standard precaution adherence, and health care worker exposures and HAIs. METHODS: This multi-site, cross-sectional study included survey data from nurses on patient safety climate, observational data on adherence, and existing health care worker exposure and health care associated infections data. Data were aggregated to hospital unit level for correlational and multivariable regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 5,285 standard precaution observations and 452 surveys were collected across 43 hospital units. Observed adherence to all categories of standard precautions was 64.4%; there were significant differences by provider role. Multivariable models identified key predictors explaining sizeable variance in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (41%), catheter associated urinary tract infections (23%), mucotaneous exposures (43%) and needlestick and sharps injuries (38%). DISCUSSION: This study produced findings not previously published thus advancing the state of the science in patient and occupational health safety. These include identifying modifiable features of the safety climate and key organizational characteristics associated better outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this novel study we identified that a positive patient safety climate and adherence to standard precautions predict key HAI and occupational health outcomes.

Identifying and Decreasing Sharps Injuries Through Root Cause Analysis in a Large Urban Hospital System.

BACKGROUND: Despite safety mandates and interventions, sharps injuries remain an occupational risk for registered nurses (RNs). Sharps and needlestick injuries increase the risk of exposure to blood-borne pathogens. Post-exposure direct and indirect costs of these percutaneous injuries have been estimated at about US$700 per incident. The goal of this quality improvement project was to identify root causes of sharps injuries for RNs at a large urban hospital system. METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of sharps injuries sustained by RNs, identification epsication of themes or root causes, and the development of a fishbone diagram to sort the causes into categories to identify workable solutions were conducted. Fisher's exact tests were performed to identify association between variables and root causes. FINDINGS: A total of 47 sharps injuries were reported from January 2020 through June 2020. Among sharps injuries sustained by nurses, 68.1% were among nurses 19 to 25 years of age and 57.4% reported job tenure of 1 to 2 years. There was a statistically significant association between root causes and tenure range, gender, and procedure type (p < .05) with moderate effect size (Cramer's V = 0.35-0.60). Technique also was a primary cause of sharps injuries for blood draw (77%), discontinuing line (75%), injection (46%), intravenous (IV) start (100%), and suturing (50%). CONCLUSIONS/APPLICATIONS TO PRACTICE: Technique and patient behavior were primary root causes of sharps injuries in this study. More sharps injuries caused by technique occurred among nurses with job tenure of 1 to 10 years, female, blood draw, discontinuing line, injection, IV start, and suturing procedures. The root cause analysis identified tenure, technique, and behavior as potential root causes of sharps injuries specifically occurring most during blood draw and injections at a large urban hospital system. These findings will inform nurses, especially new nurses in the proper use of safety devices and behaviors to prevent injury.

Reducing Sharps Injuries in the Operating Rooms of an Academic Tertiary Care Center.

BACKGROUND: Data on the prevalence and distribution of operating room (OR) sterile field sharps injuries sustained by attending surgeons, residents, scrub nurses, and surgical technologists are limited. The goal of this study is to understand current practices, injuries, and reporting behavior at an academic center, implement interventions, and assess their effect on sharps safety and reporting. METHODS: An electronic survey with questions pertaining to sharps handling practices, injuries, and reporting was e-mailed to 864 staff between July and September 2014. Adjusted analyses for risk of injury were performed. A follow-up survey was sent in January 2018, following the implementation of a shorter injury reporting form and a neutral zone. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 49.3%, with 363 completed surveys. Of respondents, 44.9% reported injuries occurring in the preceding three years. Physicians comprised 65.1% of injured staff and sustained 68.8% of the total injuries. Compared to attending surgeons, residents had a similar likelihood of injury (odds ratio 0.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-2.2), whereas scrub nurses (odds ratio 0.3, 95% CI 0.17-0.54) and technologists (odds ratio 0.3, 95% CI 0.14-0.76) had a lower likelihood. Half of those injured reported to Occupational Health Services. Of those who did not report, 46.4% stated that time was a limiting factor. Following the interventions, the incidence of injuries among survey respondents remained unchanged. However, 54.0% of respondents stated that it was easier to report injuries. CONCLUSION: Attending surgeons and residents sustain the majority of OR sterile field sharps injuries and are the least likely to report them. Shorter reports made it easier to report the injuries.

Sharps injuries with Lovenox and generic enoxaparin prefilled safety syringes: A 12-year retrospective cross-sectional analytical study.

PURPOSE: Investigate the incidence and mechanisms of sharps injuries (SI) to staff using Lovenox and generic enoxaparin prefilled syringes. METHODS: Four national adverse event databases were examined over a 12-year period for incidence and brands involved with injury events to staff using enoxaparin prefilled syringes. RESULTS: The search revealed 581 adverse events (including 20 sharps injuries) associated with device malfunction in 8 of 16 brands, with one brand mentioned significantly more frequently than others. No national alert had been issued. CONCLUSIONS: Use of certain brands of enoxaparin prefilled syringes poses a small but serious risk of injury to staff. Conducting root cause analyses on all SI is essential, as is the need for regularly evaluating safer devices, reporting all device incidents, enabling simpler reporting of adverse events, and establishing more effective intervention by FDA and manufacturers.

Saving time when preparing intravenous antibiotics.

Preparation of intravenous antibiotic doses takes up a significant amount of nurse time and exposes nurses to the risk of needlestick injury. The use of the Ecoflac® Connect needle-free connector could streamline preparation, reducing the time taken as well as eliminating needlestick injury risk. Because Ecoflac Connect is a closed system, it also minimises the risk of microbial contamination. This study showed that it took 83 experienced nurses 73.6 (SD 25.0) seconds to prepare an amoxicillin injection using the Ecoflac Connect needle-free connector compared with 110.0 (SD 34.6) seconds using the standard needle and syringe method, saving 36 seconds per dose on average, reducing the time taken by one-third. Based on recent government figures, the saving in nurse time would equate to 200-300 full-time nurses in England, equivalent to £6.15 million-£9.23 million a year. Additional savings would accrue from the prevention of needlestick injuries. Where wards are understaffed, this time saving could be critical, increasing time for care.

Sharps Injuries Among Medical Trainees and Attending Physicians.

PURPOSE: Sharps injuries are a particularly concerning occupational hazard faced by physicians and are largely preventable. This study compared the proportion and rate of sharps injuries among medical trainees with those among attending physicians by sharps injury characteristics. METHOD: The authors used data reported to the Massachusetts Sharps Injury Surveillance System from 2002-2018. Sharps injury characteristics examined were department where injury occurred, device, purpose or procedure for which device was used or intended, presence of sharps injury prevention feature, who was holding the device, and how and when the injury occurred. Global chi-square was used to assess differences in the percent distribution of sharps injury characteristics between physician groups. Joinpoint regression was used to evaluate trends in injury rates among trainees and attendings. RESULTS: From 2002-2018, 17,565 sharps injuries among physicians were reported to the surveillance system, 10,525 of which occurred among trainees. For attendings and trainees combined, sharps injuries occurred most in operating and procedure rooms and most often involved suture needles. Significant differences in sharps injuries were found between trainees and attendings with respect to department, device, and intended purpose or procedure. Sharps without engineered sharps injury protections accounted for approximately 4.4 times as many injuries (13,355, 76.0%) as those with protections (3,008, 17.1%). Among trainees, sharps injuries were highest in the first quarter of the academic year and decreased over time, while sharps injuries among attendings had a very slight, significant increase. CONCLUSIONS: Sharps injuries are an ongoing occupational hazard faced by physicians, particularly during clinical training. Further research is needed to elucidate the etiology of the observed injury patterns during the academic year. Medical training programs need to implement a multipronged approach to prevent sharps injuries, including increased use of devices with sharps injury prevention features and robust training on safe handling of sharps.