+1 Recommend
2 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Risk Reduction of Needle Stick Injuries Due to Continuous Shift from Unsafe to Safe Instruments at a German University Hospital

      Read this article at

          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.


          This study assessed protective effects of a continuous introduction of safe instruments in terms of reduction of needle stick injuries. The retrospective study analyzed correlations between the increasing proportion of safe instruments and a reduction of the incidence of needle stick injuries linked to such instruments in a German university hospital over 5 years. Incidents declined about 17.6% from 80.3 incidents per 1000 employees to 66.2, associated with an increase in the proportions of injuries due to instruments without protective mechanisms such as scalpels or hypodermic needles by 12.2%. For injuries due to venipuncture cannulae in various surgical and internal medicine departments, there was a negative association between the proportion of safe instruments and the incidence of injuries. For injection needles, portacath needles, and lancets in selected internal medicine departments, the number of injuries also dropped during this study interval. However, there was no clear-cut association with the percentage of safe instruments. This observational study suggests a correlation between the implementation of use of safe instruments and the reduction of needle stick injuries in a case of a graduated implementation. However, the effects are much less pronounced than in previous interventional studies.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 48

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

          Estimation of the global burden of disease attributable to contaminated sharps injuries among health-care workers.

          The global burden of hepatitis B (HBV), hepatitis C (HCV), and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection due to percutaneous injuries among health care workers (HCWs) is estimated. The incidence of infections attributable to percutaneous injuries in 14 geographical regions on the basis of the probability of injury, the prevalence of infection, the susceptibility of the worker, and the percutaneous transmission potential are modeled. The model also provides the attributable fractions of infection in HCWs. Overall, 16,000 HCV, 66,000 HBV, and 1,000 HIV infections may have occurred in the year 2000 worldwide among HCWs due to their occupational exposure to percutaneous injuries. The fraction of infections with HCV, HBV, and HIV in HCWs attributable to occupational exposure to percutaneous injuries fraction reaches 39%, 37%, and 4.4% respectively. Occupational exposures to percutaneous injuries are substantial source of infections with bloodborne pathogens among health-care workers (HCWs). These infections are highly preventable and should be eliminated. 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Prevalence and prevention of needlestick injuries among health care workers in a German university hospital.

            Health care workers (HCWs) are exposed to bloodborne pathogens, especially hepatitis B (HBV), hepatitis C (HCV), and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) through job-related risk factors like needlestick, stab, scratch, cut, or other bloody injuries. Needlestick injuries can be prevented by safer devices. The purpose of this study was to investigate the frequency and causes of needlestick injuries in a German university hospital. Data were obtained by an anonymous, self-reporting questionnaire. We calculated the share of reported needlestick injuries, which could have been prevented by using safety devices. 31.4% (n = 226) of participant HCWs had sustained at least one needlestick injury in the last 12 months. A wide variation in the number of reported needlestick injuries was evident across disciplines, ranging from 46.9% (n = 91/194) among medical staff in surgery and 18.7% (n = 53/283) among HCWs in pediatrics. Of all occupational groups, physicians have the highest risk to experience needlestick injuries (55.1%-n = 129/234). Evaluating the kind of activity under which the needlestick injury occurred, on average 34% (n = 191/561) of all needlestick injuries could have been avoided by the use of safety devices. Taking all medical disciplines and procedures into consideration, safety devices are available for 35.1% (n = 197/561) of needlestick injuries sustained. However, there was a significant difference across various medical disciplines in the share of needlestick injuries which might have been avoidable: Pediatrics (83.7%), gynecology (83.7%), anesthesia (59.3%), dermatology (33.3%), and surgery (11.9%). In our study, only 13.2% (n = 74/561) of needlestick injuries could have been prevented by organizational measures. There is a high rate of needlestick injuries in the daily routine of a hospital. The rate of such injuries depends on the medical discipline. Implementation of safety devices will lead to an improvement in medical staff's health and safety.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Needlestick injury rates according to different types of safety-engineered devices: results of a French multicenter study.

              To evaluate the incidence of needlestick injuries (NSIs) among different models of safety-engineered devices (SEDs) (automatic, semiautomatic, and manually activated safety) in healthcare settings. This multicenter survey, conducted from January 2005 through December 2006, examined all prospectively documented SED-related NSIs reported by healthcare workers to their occupational medicine departments. Participating hospitals were asked retrospectively to report the types, brands, and number of SEDs purchased, in order to estimate SED-specific rates of NSI. Setting. Sixty-one hospitals in France. More than 22 million SEDs were purchased during the study period, and a total of 453 SED-related NSIs were documented. The mean overall frequency of NSIs was 2.05 injuries per 100,000 SEDs purchased. Device-specific NSI rates were compared using Poisson approximation. The 95% confidence interval was used to define statistical significance. Passive (fully automatic) devices were associated with the lowest NSI incidence rate. Among active devices, those with a semiautomatic safety feature were significantly more effective than those with a manually activated toppling shield, which in turn were significantly more effective than those with a manually activated sliding shield (P < .001, chi(2) test). The same gradient of SED efficacy was observed when the type of healthcare procedure was taken into account. Passive SEDs are most effective for NSI prevention. Further studies are needed to determine whether their higher cost may be offset by savings related to fewer NSIs and to a reduced need for user training.

                Author and article information

                Eur J Microbiol Immunol (Bp)
                Eur J Microbiol Immunol (Bp)
                European Journal of Microbiology & Immunology
                Akadémiai Kiadó (Budapest )
                23 August 2016
                29 September 2016
                : 6
                : 3
                : 227-237
                [1 ] Department of Tropical Medicine at the Bernhard Nocht Institute, German Armed Forces Hospital of Hamburg , Germany
                [2 ]Institute for Medical Microbiology, Virology and Hygiene, University Medicine Rostock , Germany
                [3 ] Department of Tropical Medicine and Infectious Diseases, University Medicine Rostock , Germany
                [4 ] Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Medicine Rostock , Germany
                [5 ]Central Pharmaceutical Facility, University Medicine Rostock , Germany
                [6 ]Infectious Disease Epidemiology Group, Bernhard Nocht Institute of Tropical Medicine Hamburg , Germany
                Author notes
                * Department of Tropical Medicine at the Bernhard Nocht Institute, German Armed Forces Hospital of Hamburg, Bernhard Nocht Street 74, D-20359 Hamburg, Germany; 0049-40-6947-28700; 0049-40-6947-28709; Frickmann@

                Declaration of interest

                The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

                © The Author(s)

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 5, Equations: 0, References: 41, Pages: 11
                Founding sources The authors report that there was no source of funding.
                Original Article


                Comment on this article