Good ViBES – Results from a Victorian Blood Exposure Surveillance (ViBES) initiative 2005–2008

Sue King; Jason O’Keeffe; Deidre Edmonds; Judy Brett

doi:10.1071/HI10009

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Previous Next Contents Vol 15(3)

Good ViBES – Results from a Victorian Blood Exposure Surveillance (ViBES) initiative 2005–2008

Sue King ^A ^E ^F , Jason O’Keeffe ^B ^E , Deidre Edmonds ^C ^E and Judy Brett ^D ^E

+ Author Affiliations

- Author Affiliations

^A Royal Children’s Hospital Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

^B Northeast Health Wangaratta, Victoria, Australia.

^C Austin Health Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

^D VICNISS Coordinating Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

^E On behalf of the Victorian Blood Exposure Surveillance (ViBES) group.

^F Corresponding author. Email: sue.king@rch.org.au

Healthcare Infection 15(3) 71-75 https://doi.org/10.1071/HI10009
Submitted: 10 February 2010 Accepted: 19 August 2010 Published: 22 September 2010

Abstract

The Victorian Blood Exposure Surveillance (ViBES) group is a collaboration of 16 Victorian public healthcare services that have developed evidence-based definitions for assessing the risk of blood and body fluid exposures (BBFE) and a practical system for reporting standardised exposure rates. ViBES has been operational since 2004, and in 2008 16 healthcare services contributed data, including 10 metropolitan and 6 from regional Victoria. Data suggest the aggregate rate of total and percutaneous exposures from 2005 to 2008 to be 0.52 and 0.38 exposures per 1000 occupied bed days (OBDs), respectively, with exposures from hepatitis C-infected sources 0.03 exposures per 1000 OBDs. Significant risk exposures decreased from 0.11 to 0.08 exposures per 1000 OBDs from 2005 to 2008, along with operating room percutaneous exposures which decreased from 0.18 to 0.15 during the same period. The reduced rate of exposures during this period may be attributed to the changing healthcare landscape, such as the introduction of safety engineered devices in some facilities. These data provide an objective basis on which to assess and possibly encourage the use of safety cannulae, needle-less IV systems and other interventions to improve healthcare worker safety.

References

[1] Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Updated U.S. Public Health Service Guidelines for the Management of Occupational Exposures to HBV. HCV, and HIV and Recommendations for Post exposure Prophylaxis, MMWR morbidity and mortality report 2005, Vol. 54, No. RR-9.

[2] Medical Practitioners Board of Victoria. Medical Practitioners and Medical Students Infected with Blood Borne Infectious Diseases. http://medicalboardvic.org.au/content.php?sec=95

[3] Doebbeling BN. Lessons regarding percutaneous injuries among healthcare providers. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2003; 24(editorial): 82–85.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | last, updated 14 July 2010, accessed 14 July 2010.

[11] Preventing needlesticks and other sharps injuries. Center for Disease Control (CDC) http://www.cdc.gov/sharpssafety/PPT/3PreventingNeedlesticksPartII.ppt

[12] Newman H. Needlestick injury – a precedent case. Australian Infection Control Journal 1998; 3 14–7.

[13] Worksafe Victoria. Guidance Note June 2006. Available online at: http://www.worksafe.vic.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/WorkSafe/Home/Forms+and+Publications/Guidance+Notes/import_Needlestick+injuries+can+be+prevented

[14] Jagger J. Are Australia’s healthcare workers stuck with inadequate needle protection? Med J Aust 2002; 177(8): 405–6.
| PubMed |

[15] Cardo DM, Culver DH, Ciesielski CA. A Case Controlled Study of HIV Seroconversion in Health Care Workers after Percutaneous Exposure. N Engl J Med 1997; 337 1485–90.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed |

[16] MacCannell T, Laramie AK, Gomaa A, Perz JF. Occupational Exposure of Health Care Personnel to Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C: Prevention and Surveillance Strategies. Clin Liver Dis 20101; 14 23–6.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[17] Sohn S, Eagan J, Sepkowitz KA. Effect of Implementing Safety-Engineered Devices on Percutaneous Injury Epidemiology. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2004; 25(7): 536–42.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[18] Azar-Cavanagh M, Burdt P, Green-McKenzie J. Effect of the Introduction of an Engineered Sharps Injury Prevention Device on the Percutaneous Injury Rate in Healthcare Workers. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2007; 28 165–70.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[19] Whitby M, McLaws ML, Slater K. Needlestick injuries in a major teaching hospital: the worthwhile effect of hospital-wide replacement of conventional hollow-bore needles. Am J Infect Control 2008; 36 180–6.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[20] Leigh JP, Gillen M, Franks P, Sutherland S, Nguyen HH, Steenland K, et al. Costs of needlestick injuries and subsequent hepatitis and HIV infection. Curr Med Res Opin 2007; 23(9): 2093–105.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[22] Elmiyeh B, Whitaker S, James MJ, Chahal CAA, Galea A, Alshafi K. Needle-stick injuries in the National Health Service: a culture of silence. J R Soc Med 2004; 97 326–7.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed |

[23] Magione C, Gerberding JL, Cummings SR. Occupational Exposure to HIV: Frequency and rates or underreporting of percutaneous and mucotaneous exposure by medical housestaff. Am J Med 19911; 90 85–90.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[24] Alvarado F , Panlillio A , Cardo D . NaSH Surveillance Group. Percutaneous Injury reporting in US hospitals 1998. Presented at the 4th Decennial International Conference on Nosocomial and Health Care Associated Infections. March 5–9, 2000, Atlanta GA Abstract ID P-S2-38.