Blog
About

10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Clinical, economic, and humanistic burden of needlestick injuries in healthcare workers

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Needlestick injuries (NSIs) from a contaminated needle put healthcare workers (HCWs) at risk of becoming infected with a blood-borne virus and suffering serious short- and long-term medical consequences. Hypodermic injections using disposable syringes and needles are the most frequent cause of NSIs.

          Objective

          To perform a systematic literature review on NSI and active safety-engineered devices for hypodermic injection.

          Methods

          MEDLINE, EMBASE, and COCHRANE databases were searched for studies that evaluated the clinical, economic, or humanistic outcomes of NSI or active safety-engineered devices.

          Results

          NSIs have been reported by 14.9%–69.4% of HCWs with the wide range due to differences in countries, settings, and methodologies used to determine rates. Exposure to contaminated sharps is responsible for 37%–39% of the worldwide cases of hepatitis B and C infections in HCWs. HCWs may experience serious emotional effects and mental health disorders after a NSI, resulting in work loss and post-traumatic stress disorder. In 2015 International US$ (IntUS$), the average cost of a NSI was IntUS$747 (range IntUS$199–1,691). Hypodermic injections, the most frequent cause of NSI, are responsible for 32%–36% of NSIs. The use of safety devices that cover the needle-tip after hypodermic injection lowers the risk of NSI per HCW by 43.4%–100% compared to conventional devices. The economic value of converting to safety injective devices shows net savings, favorable budget impact, and overall cost-effectiveness.

          Conclusion

          The clinical, economic, and humanistic burden is substantial for HCWs who experience a NSI. Safety-engineered devices for hypodermic injection demonstrate value by reducing NSI risk, and the associated direct and indirect costs, psychological stress on HCWs, and occupational blood-borne viral infection risk.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 72

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Unsafe injections in the developing world and transmission of bloodborne pathogens: a review.

          Unsafe injections are suspected to occur routinely in developing countries. We carried out a literature review to quantify the prevalence of unsafe injections and to assess the disease burden of bloodborne infections attributable to this practice. Quantitative information on injection use and unsafe injections (defined as the reuse of syringe or needle between patients without sterilization) was obtained by reviewing the published literature and unpublished WHO reports. The transmissibility of hepatitis B and C viruses and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) was estimated using data from studies of needle-stick injuries. Finally, all epidemiological studies that linked unsafe injections and bloodborne infections were evaluated to assess the attributable burden of bloodborne infections. It was estimated that each person in the developing world receives 1.5 injections per year on average. However, institutionalized children, and children and adults who are ill or hospitalized, including those infected with HIV, are often exposed to 10-100 times as many injections. An average of 95% of all injections are therapeutic, the majority of which were judged to be unnecessary. At least 50% of injections were unsafe in 14 of 19 countries (representing five developing world regions) for which data were available. Eighteen studies reported a convincing link between unsafe injections and the transmission of hepatitis B and C, HIV, Ebola and Lassa virus infections and malaria. Five studies attributed 20-80% of all new hepatitis B infections to unsafe injections, while three implicated unsafe injections as a major mode of transmission of hepatitis C. In conclusion, unsafe injections occur routinely in most developing world regions, implying a significant potential for the transmission of any bloodborne pathogen. Unsafe injections currently account for a significant proportion of all new hepatitis B and C infections. This situation needs to be addressed immediately, as a political and policy issue, with responsibilities clearly defined at the global, country and community levels.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Occupational exposure to needlestick injuries and hepatitis B vaccination coverage among health care workers in Egypt.

            The health care worker (HCW) is at substantial risk of acquiring bloodborne pathogen infections through exposure to blood or infectious body fluids. Hepatitis B vaccination of HCWs and optimal HCW practices regarding management of sharps can minimize these risks. This study explores the frequency of exposure to needlestick injuries and the hepatitis B vaccination coverage among HCWs in Egypt. All HCWs available in a 25% random sample of different types of health care facilities from 2 governorates in Egypt (Nile Delta and Upper Egypt) were included in the study. A total of 1485 HCWs were interviewed. History of exposure to needlestick injuries, vaccination status, and socioeconomic data were collected. Of the 1485 HCWs interviewed, 529 (35.6%) were exposed to at least 1 needlestick injury during the past 3 months with an estimated annual number of 4.9 needlesticks per worker. The most common behavior associated with needlestick injuries was 2-handed recapping. Overall, 64% of HCWs disposed of needles unsafely in nonpuncture-proof containers. Overall 15.8% of HCWs reported receiving 3 doses of hepatitis B vaccine. Vaccination coverage was highest among professional staff (38%) and lowest among housekeeping staff (3.5%). Using Kane's model to predict infections after needlestick exposures, we estimate 24,004 hepatitis C virus and 8617 hepatitis B virus infections occur each year in Egypt as a result of occupational exposure in the health care environment. High rates of needlestick injuries and low vaccination coverage contribute highly to the rates of viral hepatitis infections among HCWs. Prevention of occupational infection with bloodborne pathogens should be a priority to the national program for promotion of infection control. Training of HCWs on safe handling and collection of needles and sharps, and hepatitis B vaccination of all HCWs is required to reduce transmission.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Needlestick injuries in the United States. Epidemiologic, economic, and quality of life issues.

              Best evidence from prospective studies with aggressive monitoring suggests that the incidence of needlestick injuries is significantly higher than reported through passive surveillance, ranging from 14 to 839 needlestick injuries per 1,000 health care workers per year. The economic cost of managing these injuries is substantial, ranging from dollars 51 to dollars 3,766 (2002 U.S. dollars). This amount excludes the cost of treating the long-term complications of needlestick injuries, such as HIV and hepatitis B and C infections, each of which can cost several hundreds of thousands of dollars to manage. In addition, health care workers experience significant fear, anxiety, and emotional distress following a needlestick injury, sometimes resulting in occupational and behavior changes. Despite the availability of engineered injury prevention devices, the implementation of these new technologies has been mixed in part because of the perception that these devices are costly and cost ineffective. However, widespread use of safety devices might be more easily justified on economic grounds when the full clinical and economic benefits of these new technologies are considered, especially within the context of injury prevention.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Med Devices (Auckl)
                Med Devices (Auckl)
                Medical Devices: Evidence and Research
                Medical Devices (Auckland, N.Z.)
                Dove Medical Press
                1179-1470
                2017
                29 September 2017
                : 10
                : 225-235
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Pharmacy Practice & Science, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, MD
                [2 ]Pharmerit International, Bethesda, MD, USA
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Catherine E Cooke, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, 20 N. Pine Street, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA, Tel +1 410 706 1451, Email cCooke@ 123456rx.umaryland.edu
                Article
                mder-10-225
                10.2147/MDER.S140846
                5628664
                © 2017 Cooke and Stephens. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited

                The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.

                Categories
                Review

                Comments

                Comment on this article