Improved surveillance and mandated use of sharps with engineered sharp injury protections: a national call to action
Cathryn MurphyFaculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, QLD 4229 and Infection Control Plus, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia. Email: cmurp@icp.au.com
Healthcare Infection 13(2) 33-37 https://doi.org/10.1071/HI08019
Published: 18 June 2008
Abstract
Based on the 2435 parenteral exposures sustained by staff reported in 2005 from 170 Australian hospitals, it is possible that an estimated more than 18 500 needle-stick injuries (NSIs) could occur in Australian hospitals each year. These injuries are largely preventable. Each injury causes significant distress to the involved healthcare worker. To reduce the local burden of NSI, administrators and clinicians require incident and organisation-specific information. This information enables targeted prevention strategies, including safety engineered devices, to be implemented. The larger the dataset of NSI information, the better the opportunity to develop appropriate targeted strategies. Unfortunately, the Australian healthcare sector has, to date, largely overlooked the issue of standardising NSI monitoring, with a small 56-hospital, quasi-national surveillance system becoming non-operational in 1998. However, the recent initial enthusiasm the sector has demonstrated for increased patient and healthcare worker safety provides an excellent platform from which to consider possible models that could be adopted for routine monitoring of NSIs and mandated use of safety engineered devices.
[1] Mallon DF, Shearwood W, Mallal SA, French MA, Dawkins RL. Exposure to blood borne infections in health care workers. Med J Aust 1992; 157 592–5.
| PubMed | [accessed March 2007].
[6] 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 | [accessed 25th May 2008].
[8]
[9] Jagger JC. Are Australia’s healthcare workers stuck with inadequate needle protection? The most direct way to reduce percutaneous injuries is to make devices safer. Med J Aust 2002; 177 405–6.
| PubMed | [accessed February 2008].
[14]
[15]
[16] Sohn S, Eagan J, Sepkowitz KA, Zuccotti G. Effect of implementing safety-engineered devices on percutaneous injury epidemiology. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2004; 25 536–42.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | [accessed February 2007].
[21]
[22] Venier AG, Vincent A, L’Heriteau F, Floret N, Sénéchal H, Abiteboul D, et al. Surveillance of occupational blood and body fluid exposures among French healthcare workers in 2004. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2007; 28 1196–201.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | [accessed February 2007].
[32]
[33]
[34]