Abstract
This article presents the research from the first phase of our study on blood-borne risk management, wherein we solicited epidemiologists’ and healthcare practitioners’ expert opinions on a blood-borne infection risk assessment in Poland. Forty-two experts were recommended by epidemiology consultants and recruited from all districts in Poland. We used the SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) method in the evaluation. Experts’ opinions showed that there is room for improvement in the prevention of blood-borne infections. Commonly reported weaknesses in the risk assessment included gaps in knowledge and inappropriate procedures, which are largely caused by financial constraints and practitioners’ lack of awareness of developments in their trade. Strengths included legal regulations for medical services and procedures, surveillance, and increasing awareness on the part of medical staff. When paired with the existing statistical data, these results provide a comprehensive view of the problem of blood-borne infections in Poland. The analysis supported the development of a strategy proposal to prevent blood-borne infections and enhance existing risk assessment procedures.
Highlights
Statistical data on blood-borne infections are processed and used within the sentinel system.Databases on health indicators, covered by the obligation to report all diagnosed cases, are a crucial element of this surveillance system
This is important for public health because of the unmeasured, potential risk of blood-borne infections in nonmedical services, where procedures are conducted with less epidemiological supervision than is required in the healthcare service sector
We focus on the responses that clarify the strengths and weaknesses of blood-borne infection risk management in public health
Summary
Statistical data on blood-borne infections are processed and used within the sentinel system.Databases on health indicators, covered by the obligation to report all diagnosed cases, are a crucial element of this surveillance system. Knowledge of the problems and discrepancies (on processes and health indicators) at different levels and kinds of public health services allows for continual improvement, as per the well-known rule “hominis est errare, insipientis in errore perseverare” [1]. This is important for public health because of the unmeasured, potential risk of blood-borne infections in nonmedical services, where procedures are conducted with less epidemiological supervision than is required in the healthcare service sector
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 callMore From: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Disclaimer: 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.
