Abstract
BackgroundAnnually, there are a high number of needlestick injuries (NSIs) among health care workers (HCWs) globally. The knowledge and practice of HCWs of universal precautions (UPs) play an important role in determining the risk of an NSI. The objective of this study was to compare the knowledge and practices of UPs among HCWs with NSIs with HCWs without NSIs, in Ugu north sub-district in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN), South Africa, between 2010 and 2014.MethodsA study among HCWs having an NSI (n = 100) between 2010 and 2014 compared with controls (n = 200) was conducted in 2016–2017 at a district hospital and 11 primary health care facilities in Ugu north sub-district, KZN, South Africa. Health care workers’ knowledge and practices of UPs were assessed by using a standardised questionnaire. Knowledge and practice responses were scored, and means and standard deviations (SDs) were calculated. Total scores of knowledge and practices were categorised into acceptable and unacceptable, and a binary logistic model was used to identify independent factors associated with being a case. The accepted level of significance was 0.05.ResultsThe majority of the participants were nurses (n = 233; 77.7%) and female (n = 227; 75.7%). Control HCWs had better practice scores for UPs (86.13%; SD: 16.57) compared with cases (82.43%; SD: 19.98). The logistic regression analysis showed that the HCWs with acceptable knowledge and unacceptable practice were more likely to have had an NSI (odds ratio [OR]: 5.8; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.4–24.0).ConclusionThere were significant differences between cases and controls with respect to knowledge and practice of UPs that are important findings for workplace health and safety and HCW training.
Highlights
Needlestick injury (NSI) is one of the most common routes of transmission of occupationally acquired blood-borne diseases in health care workers (HCWs)
The health care facilities (HCFs) are run by nurses and nurses make up the majority of the population
The logistic regression analysis showed that HCWs with acceptable knowledge and unacceptable practice of universal precautions (UPs) had a far greater odds of having sustained an NSI (OR: 5.8), suggesting that the knowledge which case HCWs had did not translate into practice
Summary
Needlestick injury (NSI) is one of the most common routes of transmission of occupationally acquired blood-borne diseases in health care workers (HCWs). The World Health Organization (WHO)[2] and the Centers for Disease Control[3] recommend the practice of universal precautions (UPs) by HCWs as a means of preventing and reducing the transmission of blood-borne diseases in health care settings. The elements of UPs include hand hygiene (washing and drying), respiratory hygiene or cough etiquette and use of personal protective equipment such as gloves, masks, coats, closed shoes, patient care equipment (protective clothing), care of the environment, clean textiles and laundry, safe injection practices (safe handling and disposal of sharps) and isolation precautions.[2,3] Compliance with UPs has minimised the risk of health care infections and reduced NSIs.[4,5,6] A systematic review of the efficacy of interventions to promote hand hygiene in hospitals found that there were reductions in the transmission of hospital pathogens in the presence of improved hand hygiene in the 19 studies that reported on clinical outcomes.[5] Yang et al reported, in their systematic http://www.sajid.co.za. The objective of this study was to compare the knowledge and practices of UPs among HCWs with NSIs with HCWs without NSIs, in Ugu north sub-district in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN), South Africa, between 2010 and 2014
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
