Infection control standards for Australian prisons: forgotten, but not forgiving
Michael H. Levy A C and Daniel Mogg BA College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia.
B School of Psychology, Psychiatry and Psychological Medicine, Monash University, Caulfield, Vic. 3145, Australia.
C Corresponding author. Email: michael.levy@act.gov.au
Healthcare Infection 14(1) 13-19 https://doi.org/10.1071/HI09004
Published: 12 March 2009
Abstract
Australian prisons have been the setting for several breaches in infection control; episodes that have had real or potential effects on the prisoner population and the general community. However, this review of peer-reviewed literature pertaining to infection control practices and to various routes of disease transmission reveals that some credible risks have not been described in Australian prisons, which may be expressions of a weak surveillance system. In these instances, references from the international (some historical) peer-reviewed literature were sought. Australian prisoners do not currently benefit from all protective mechanisms, available in the general community. There are currently no nationally agreed infection control guidelines for Australian prisons.
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4] Chisolm SA. Infection control in correctional facilities: a new challenge. Am J Infect Control 1988; 16 107–13.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed | [verified January 2009].
[32] Duncan LE, Bukenya GB, Howard PE. An outbreak of unknown aetiology in a correctional institution: implications for the development of public health laboratories. Papua New Guinea Med J 1988; 31 29–34.
| CAS | [verified January 2009].
[49] Post JJ, Dolan KA, Whybin LR, Carter IW, Haber PS, Lloyd AR. Acute hepatitis C virus infection in an Australian prison inmate: tattooing as a possible transmission route. Med J Aust 2001; 174 183–4.
| CAS | PubMed | [verified 10 January 2009].
* *The term ‘grey literature’ refers to a body of materials that cannot be found easily through conventional channels. The US Interagency Gray Literature Working Group (January 1995) defined grey literature as ‘foreign or domestic open source material that usually is available through specialised channels and may not enter normal channels or systems of publication, distribution, bibliographic control, or acquisition by booksellers or subscription agents.’ Examples of grey literature include technical reports from government agencies or scientific research groups, working papers from research groups or committees, white papers, or preprints.
† †There are no comparable published numbers in Australia, but they would be of the order of 20 000 prison-based employees, and hundreds of thousands of visitors annually.