15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

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

      AAOHN journal : official journal of the American Association of Occupational Health Nurses
      Accidents, Occupational, economics, psychology, statistics & numerical data, Attitude of Health Personnel, Cost of Illness, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Epidemiologic Research Design, Equipment Design, HIV Infections, etiology, transmission, Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, Human Engineering, Humans, Incidence, Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional, methods, Medical Waste Disposal, instrumentation, Needlestick Injuries, complications, epidemiology, Personnel, Hospital, Population Surveillance, Quality of Life, Risk Factors, United States

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPubMed
      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

          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.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Comments

          Comment on this article