Infection and chemotherapy

The Korean Society of Infectious Diseases (대한감염학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Elimination of Lancet-Related Needlestick Injuries Using a Safety-Engineered Lancet: Experience in a Hospital

  • An, Hye-sun (Infection Control Office, Boramae Medical Center) ;
  • Ko, Suhui (Infection Control Office, Boramae Medical Center) ;
  • Bang, Ji Hwan (Infection Control Office, Boramae Medical Center) ;
  • Park, Sang-Won (Infection Control Office, Boramae Medical Center)
  • Received : 2018.09.07
  • Accepted : 2018.09.28
  • Published : 2018.12.31
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: Lancet-related needlestick injuries (NSIs) occur steadily in clinical practices. Safety-engineered devices (SEDs) can systematically reduce NSIs. However, the use of SEDs is not active and no study to guide the implementation of SEDs was known in South Korea. The lancet-related NSIs may be eliminated to zero incidence using a SED lancet with effective sharp injury protection and reuse prevention features. Materials and Methods: We implemented a SED lancet by replacing a conventional prick lancet in a tertiary hospital in a sequential approach. A spot test of the new SED was conducted for 1 month to check the acceptability in practice and a questionnaire survey was obtained from the healthcare workers (HCWs). A pilot implementation of the SED lancet in 2 wards was made for 1 year. Based on these preliminary interventions, a hospital-wide full implementation of the SED lancet was launched. The incidence of NSIs and cost expenditure before and after the intervention were compared. Results: There were 29 cases of conventional prick lancet-related NSIs for 3 years before the full implementation of SED lancet. The proportion of prick lancet-related NSIs among yearly all kinds of NSIs during two years before the pilot study was average 11.7% (22/188). Pre-interventional baseline incidence of all kinds of NSIs was 7.01 per 100 HCW-years. After the full implementation of SED lancet, the lancet-related NSIs became zero in the 2nd year (P = 0.001). The average direct cost of 18,393 US dollars (USD) per year from device and post-exposure medical care before the intervention rose to 20,701 USD in the 2nd year of the intervention. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 210 USD per injury avoided. Conclusion: The implementation of a SED lancet could eliminate the lancet-related NSIs to zero incidence. The cost increase incurred by the use of SED lancet was tolerable.

Keywords

References

  1. Green B, Griffiths EC. Psychiatric consequences of needlestick injury. Occup Med (Lond) 2013;63:183-8. https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqt006
  2. Naghavi SH, Shabestari O, Alcolado J. Post-traumatic stress disorder in trainee doctors with previous needlestick injuries. Occup Med (Lond) 2013;63:260-5. https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqt027
  3. Mannocci A, De Carli G, Di Bari V, Saulle R, Unim B, Nicolotti N, Carbonari L, Puro V, La Torre G. How much do needlestick injuries cost? A systematic review of the economic evaluations of needlestick and sharps injuries among healthcare personnel. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;37:635-46. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2016.48
  4. Pruss-Ustun A, Rapiti E, Hutin Y. Estimation of the global burden of disease attributable to contaminated sharps injuries among health-care workers. Am J Ind Med 2005;48:482-90. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.20230
  5. Cooke CE, Stephens JM. Clinical, economic, and humanistic burden of needlestick injuries in healthcare workers. Med Devices (Auckl) 2017;10:225-35.
  6. World Health Organization (WHO). WHO guideline on the use of safety-engineered syringes for intramuscular, intradermal and subcutaneous injections in health care settings. Available at: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/250144/1/9789241549820-eng.pdf. Accessed 01 February 2016.
  7. Jagger J, Perry J, Gomaa A, Phillips EK. The impact of U.S. policies to protect healthcare workers from bloodborne pathogens: the critical role of safety-engineered devices. J Infect Public Health 2008;1:62-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2008.10.002
  8. Phillips EK, Conaway M, Parker G, Perry J, Jagger J. Issues in understanding the impact of the needlestick safety and prevention act on hospital sharps injuries. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2013;34:935-9. https://doi.org/10.1086/671733
  9. Adams D, Elliott TS. Impact of safety needle devices on occupationally acquired needlestick injuries: a four-year prospective study. J Hosp Infect 2006;64:50-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2006.04.012
  10. Kuhar DT, Henderson DK, Struble KA, Heneine W, Thomas V, Cheever LW, Gomaa A, Panlilio AL; US Public Health Service Working Group. Updated US Public Health Service guidelines for the management of occupational exposures to human immunodeficiency virus and recommendations for postexposure prophylaxis. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2013;34:875-92. https://doi.org/10.1086/672271
  11. U.S. Public Health Service. Updated U.S. Public Health Service guidelines for the management of occupational exposures to HBV, HCV, and HIV and recommendations for postexposure prophylaxis. MMWR Recomm Rep 2001;50(RR-11):1-52.
  12. Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Appendix B: Postexposure prophylaxis to prevent hepatitis B virus infection. MMWR Recomm Rep 2006;55(RR-16):30-1.
  13. Menezes JA, Bandeira CS, Quintana M, de Lima E Silva JC, Calvet GA, Brasil P, Brasil P. Impact of a single safety-engineered device on the occurrence of percutaneous injuries in a general hospital in Brazil. Am J Infect Control 2014;42:174-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2013.07.017
  14. Wu HC, Ho JJ, Lin MH, Chen CJ, Guo YL, Shiao JS. Incidence of percutaneous injury in Taiwan healthcare workers. Epidemiol Infect 2015;143:3308-15. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268815000321
  15. Oh HS, Yi SE, Choe KW. Epidemiological characteristics of occupational blood exposures of healthcare workers in a university hospital in South Korea for 10 years. J Hosp Infect 2005;60:269-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2004.11.026
  16. Park S, Jeong I, Huh J, Yoon Y, Lee S, Choi C. Needlestick and sharps injuries in a tertiary hospital in the Republic of Korea. Am J Infect Control 2008;36:439-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2007.07.011
  17. Yun YH, Chung YK, Jeong JS, Jeong IS, Park ES, Yoon SW, Jin HY, Park JH, Han SH, Choi JH, Choi HR, Han MK, Choi SI. Epidemiological characteristics and scale for needlestick injury in some university hospital workers. Korean J Occup Environ Med 2011;23:371-8. https://doi.org/10.35371/kjoem.2011.23.4.371
  18. Lee JH, Cho J, Kim YJ, Im SH, Jang ES, Kim JW, Kim HB, Jeong SH. Occupational blood exposures in health care workers: incidence, characteristics, and transmission of bloodborne pathogens in South Korea. BMC Public Health 2017;17:827. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4844-0
  19. Elseviers MM, Arias-Guillen M, Gorke A, Arens HJ. Sharps injuries amongst healthcare workers: review of incidence, transmissions and costs. J Ren Care 2014;40:150-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/jorc.12050
  20. Ministry of Employment and Labor. Occupational safety and health act, article 24. Available at: http://www.law.go.kr/engLsSc.do?menuId=0&p1=&subMenu=5&query=Occupational+safety+and+health+act&x=0&y=0#liBgcolor17. Accessed 1 February 2018.
  21. Ministry of Employment and Labor. Enforcement decree of the occupational safety and health act, article 597. Available at: http://www.law.go.kr/engLsSc.do?menuId=0&p1=&subMenu=5&query=Occupational+safety+and+health+act&x=0&y=0#liBgcolor0. Accessed 1 February 2018.

Cited by

  1. Needlestick and sharps injuries in an Indonesian tertiary teaching hospital from 2014 to 2017: a cohort study vol.10, pp.12, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041494