Safety-engineered Devices Research Articles

Occupational Exposure and HIV Prevalence among Healthcare Workers: Risks, Prevention, and Management Strategies

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at heightened risk of occupational exposure to HIV due to their frequent interaction with blood and bodily fluids. This exposure led to potential HIV transmission if not managed promptly and effectively. This review provided a comprehensive examination of the risks associated with HIV exposure among HCWs, exploring the prevalence of such incidents, and evaluating current prevention and management strategies. Key risks included needlestick injuries and blood splashes, with prevalence varying significantly by region, particularly in areas with high HIV burden. Prevention strategies encompassed adherence to standard precautions, use of safety-engineered devices, comprehensive training, and the provision of post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP). Effective management involved immediate post-exposure assessment, timely administration of PEP, regular follow-up care, and access to counseling services. The review synthesizes recent research and clinical evidence, utilizing a systematic analysis of literature and guidelines to inform best practices in HIV risk management for HCWs. By addressing these strategies, the review aimed to enhance safety protocols and improve health outcomes within healthcare settings. Keywords: Occupational Exposure, Healthcare Workers, HIV Prevention, Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP), Infection Control.

Did safety-engineered device implementation contribute to reducing the risk of needlestick and sharps injuries? Retrospective investigation of 20 years of observation in a specialist tertiary referral hospital.

In Poland, there are numerous cases of injuries caused by sharp instruments annually, still significantly more than in other European Union countries. The aim of this study was to analyze work-related injuries among healthcare workers in a selected hospital before and after the implementation of safety-engineered devices (SED). Retrospective analysis of medical documentation regarding occupational needlestick and sharps injuries (NSSI) in a tertiary referral surgical hospital in 1998-2018. The study group consisted of nurses and doctors who had been injured and reported the incident. The frequency of injury reports, injury rate, and characterization of circumstances surrounding NSSI are presented. Over the period of 20 years, a total of 257 NSSI incidents were reported. The average injury rate was statistically significant for nurses (p = 0.004) and was higher before the introduction of SED. Moreover, the number of injuries among nurses showed a downward trend during the study period. However, for doctors, there was no statistically significant difference in the median puncture rate (p = 0.099), and the number of injuries showed an increasing trend. In this study, the authors' have demonstrated not only the occurrence of injuries and punctures in the daily work of medical personnel but also the potential for their reduction through the use of safety equipment at every workstation where healthcare services are provided using sharp medical instruments. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2024;37(2):234-43.

Needlestick Injuries With Insulin Injections: Risk Factors, Concerns, and Implications of the Use of Safety Pen Needles in the Asia-Pacific Region.

Globally, health care workers (HCWs) are at a high risk of occupational exposure to needlestick injuries (NSIs). Needlestick injuries not only are associated with an increased risk of infections caused by bloodborne pathogens but are also a primary source of emotional distress and job burnout for HCWs and patients. Insulin injection-related NSIs are common among HCWs working in hospitals in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region and impose a significant burden. Insulin pen needles have a high risk of transmitting infections (at both the patient-end and cartridge end of the sharp) after use. Recapping a needle after administering an insulin injection poses a major risk to HCWs. Currently, several safety-engineered needle devices (SENDs) are available with active or passive safety mechanisms. Passive insulin safety pen needles with dual-ended protection and automatic recapping capabilities have resulted in a significant drop in accidental punctures to HCWs while administering insulin to patients with diabetes. In this article, we have reviewed the burden and common causes of NSIs with insulin injections among HCWs in the APAC region. We have discussed current approaches to address the issues associated with NSIs and the benefits of introducing SENDs in health care settings, including long-term care facilities, nursing homes, and home care settings where patients may require assisted insulin injections. This review also summarizes key strategies/recommendations to prevent NSIs in HCWs and patients with diabetes in the APAC region.

EE439 Prevention of Needlestick Injuries and Blood Exposures Among Kenyan Healthcare Workers Using Safety Engineered Devices

Exposure to blood-borne pathogens poses a serious risk to health care workers (HCW). In Kenya, 76.6% of occupational exposures to HIV/AIDs among HCWs were attributed to needle stick injuries (NSIs). Blood exposures (BEs) are strongly associated with lack of safety device use and inadequate safety practices. Safety engineered devices (SEDs) can be a cost-effective solution as they can minimize the involved risks.

Barriers to and attitudes towards the use of safety engineered devices for paediatric cannulation in emergency care

ABSTRACTThis article describes a report of the attitudes towards and barriers to the use of safety cannulas in paediatric patients. The evaluation was prompted by a lack of engagement from both doctors and nurses who continued to use non-safety-engineered devices (non-SEDs) after safety-engineered devices (SEDs) were introduced into a paediatric emergency department (ED). A survey was conducted among doctors and nurses working in the paediatric ED with questions focusing on the participants’ clinical experience, views on safety, access to training and device preference, providing both quantitative and qualitative data. The findings highlighted several issues, including a difference in opinion between professional groups towards safe sharps. Significant differences in access to training and education between doctors and nurses were also identified; including those with up-to-date training appearing more likely to use a SED than those without. Recommendations including strategies for improving compliance have been proposed, with a plan to conduct a clinical audit to measure compliance at a later date.

MSR43 The Use of Safety-Engineered Devices in Preventing Needle-Stick Injuries: A Budget Impact Analysis

Needle-stick injuries (NSI) expose healthcare workers (HCWs) to the risk of infection with a blood-borne virus and incur serious medical consequences. The standardized introduction of safety-engineered devices (SEDs) is strongly suggested in the European Union (EU) hospital setting, from May 2013. Our research objective was the economic advantages definition for a hospital related to the SEDs introduction, across Italy, France, Germany, Spain, Netherlands, Belgium, United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia.

Prevalence and influence factors of occupational exposure to blood and body fluids in registered Chinese nurses: a national cross-sectional study

BackgroundOccupational exposure to blood and body fluids poses a threat to medical providers and to nurses especially. This harm is not only physical, but psychology as well and can ultimately impact patient safety. This study aims to understand the prevalence of occupational exposure to blood and body fluids among Chinese registered nurses and explores the factors that influence this exposure.MethodsA cross-sectional online survey was conducted for 31 province-level divisions in China, using a self-created questionnaire entitled Status Survey on Occupational Exposure in Nurses. Descriptive statistics were used to describe both the demographic characteristics of the respondents and the characteristics of occupational exposure. Categorical variables were presented as frequencies and percentage, and the relationship between possible influential factors and the occurrence of occupational exposure was determined using binary logistic regression.ResultsOut of a total of 20,791 nurses analyzed, over half (52.1%) of them had experienced occupational exposure to blood or body fluids, but over 1/3 (34.6%) of them did not ever report their exposures to a supervisor/official. The top three causes of under-reporting were: the source patient failed to test positive for infectious pathogens (43.6%), perception of a burdensome reporting process (24.6%), and indifferent attitude towards being infected (16.9%). Nurses who worked over 8 hours per day had higher risks of exposure (OR 1.199, 95% CI 1.130 to 1.272, P < 0.001, respectively). The occupational exposure risk from providing 1–2 types of PPE is 1.947 times that of providing 9–10 types of PPE (OR 1.947, 95% CI 1.740 to 2.178, P < 0.001). Likewise, the occupational exposure risk of providing 1–2 types of safety-engineered injection devices is 1.275 times of that of providing 5–6 types (OR 1.275, 95% CI 1.179 to 1.379, P < 0.001).ConclusionsOccupational exposure to blood and body fluids in registered nurses is common, but the rate of under-reporting such exposure is high. Implementing engineered “sharp” injury prevention devices, following exposure prevention procedures, giving sufficient education and training to healthcare personnel on exposure prevention and control, and developing exposure reporting policies are all steps that can both reduce exposure and increase its reporting.

Barriers to and attitudes towards the use of safety engineered devices for paediatric cannulation in emergency care.

This article describes a report of the attitudes towards and barriers to the use of safety cannulas in paediatric patients. The evaluation was prompted by a lack of engagement from both doctors and nurses who continued to use non-safety-engineered devices (non-SEDs) after safety-engineered devices (SEDs) were introduced into a paediatric emergency department (ED). A survey was conducted among doctors and nurses working in the paediatric ED with questions focusing on the participants' clinical experience, views on safety, access to training and device preference, providing both quantitative and qualitative data. The findings highlighted several issues, including a difference in opinion between professional groups towards safe sharps. Significant differences in access to training and education between doctors and nurses were also identified; including those with up-to-date training appearing more likely to use a SED than those without. Recommendations including strategies for improving compliance have been proposed, with a plan to conduct a clinical audit to measure compliance at a later date.

Non-Safety and Safety Device Sharp Injuries-Risk of Incidents, SEDs Availability, Attitudes and Perceptions of Nurses According to Cross-Sectional Survey in Poland.

Sharp injuries are a serious issue among healthcare workers (HCWs). The aim of the study was to examine the frequency of sharps injuries among nurses (who have the most frequent contact with infectious material) when using devices with and without safety features, then to analyse the factors associated with such injuries and to compare the risk of injuries with safety engineered devices (SEDs) and non-safety engineered devices (non-SEDs). An online cross-sectional survey was completed between October 2021 and March 2022 by 280 nurses. The incidence of exposure to sharp injury during their professional life was 51.4%. The percentage of nurses experiencing a sharp injury in the year preceding the study was 29% and 9.6% for superficially and deep injury, respectively. Ampoules and conventional hollow-bore needles caused the most injuries (25.92% and 22.64% of nurses in the last year). Factors including sex (males), age and seniority (elderly), education (higher), work exhaustion and being left-handed were associated with the occurrence of conventional hollow-bore needle injuries. In the case of SEDs: age, seniority and right/left-handed were the most frequent risk factors associated with the occurrence of sharp injuries. SEDs injuries were much less frequent than non-SEDs. There was a significant difference between the risk of injuries with safety and non-safety needles, central cannulas and ampoules. Fisher’s exact test (p-value = 0.000) and positive Spearman’s rho statistics (0.2319, p-value = 0.0001) confirmed that in accredited hospitals, the availability of safety needles was higher. Almost half of the nurses (n = 115, 41.07%) stated that staff had little influence on the type of medical sharp instruments supplied. To reduce the risk of nurse injuries, access to medical devices with safe protection mechanisms should be ensured, the use of sharp instruments should be limited where possible, managers should consult nurses regarding the choice of safe devices, and training programs on the proper use of SEDs should be available.

Prevention from Sharp Injuries in the Hospital Sector: An Italian National Observatory on the Implementation of the Council Directive 2010/32/EU before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Sharp injuries, determining the risk of bloodborne infections and psychological distress in healthcare workers, may be prevented by a set of strategies, legally enforced in Europe through the Directive 2010/32/EU. To assess its level of implementation in Italy, a national survey was conducted in 2017 and again in 2021, evaluating the progress and possible drawbacks of the COVID-19 pandemic. Altogether, 285 safety managers and 330 nurses from a representative sample of 97 and 117 public hospitals were interviewed using a standardized questionnaire. Knowledge of the Directive requirements decreased significantly, with <60% of participants answering correctly in 2021, and nurses’ attendance in specific courses dropped to 25% in 2021 compared to 54% in 2017. Over 75% of hospitals introduced multiple safety-engineered devices (SED), though total replacement occurred in <50% of cases; routine SED availability increased for blood collection (89%) and venous access devices (83%). Incorrect behaviors in handling sharps decreased significantly over time. Nurses’ HBV vaccination coverage was high (89% in both surveys); in the last year, 97% were vaccinated against COVID, and 47% against influenza. Average annual injuries per hospital did not increase significantly (32 in 2021 vs. 26 in 2017). In 2017, nurses’ perceived safety barriers were working in emergency situations (49%) and lack of resources (40%); in 2021, understaffing (73%), physical fatigue (62%), and handling difficulties while wearing full protective equipment (59%). Safety measures were implemented in Italian hospitals, and although the average injuries per hospital did not show a decrease, these measures could have helped protect healthcare workers during the pandemic, mitigating its potential impact on the increase in situations at risk of injury.

Occupational Exposure to Sharp Instrument Injuries Among Registered Nurses in Public and Private Hospitals of Lahore Pakistan

The purpose of this literature review and analysis report is to expose occupational exposure to sharp instrument injuries among registered nurses in public and private hospitals of Lahore Pakistan and associated factors related to sharp instrument injuries among nurses in public and private hospitals of Lahore Pakistan. Nurses are exposed to various risk factors and risky Behaviour that may seriously affect their health and ability to work. Despite recent technological advances such as safety-engineered devices (SEDs), these injuries continue to occur in healthcare facilities worldwide. The searches were restricted to papers published from 2015 to the present, those written in English, and those using the keywords exposure, hospital, doctor, nurse, and sharp injuries or needle stick injuries.

Comparing risk changes of needlestick injuries between countries adopted and not adopted the needlestick safety and prevention act: A meta-analysis.

To determine whether countries that adopted the Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act (NSPA) achieved a reduced risk of needlestick injuries (NSIs). In this meta-analysis, 3 international databases (Embase, PubMed, and MEDLINE EBSCO) and 1 Chinese database (Airiti Library) were searched using appropriate keywords to retrieve relevant articles, including multiyear NSI incidences that were published after 2010. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Prevalence Studies was used to evaluate article prevalence. A binary random-effects model was used to estimate risk ratio as summary effect. A log scale was used to evaluate differences in risk ratios of NSIs between countries that adopted versus those that did not adopt the NSPA. In total, 11 articles were included in the meta-analysis from 9 countries, and NSI incidence rates were surveyed between 1993 and 2016. The risk ratios of NSIs in countries with and without the NSPA were 0.78 (95% CI, 0.67-0.91) and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.85-1.12), respectively, and the ratio of risk ratios was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.65-0.98). Reduction in NSI incidence was more prominent in nurses than in physicians. Our findings suggest that the mandatory use of safety-engineered medical devices in countries that adopted the NSPA had lower NSI incidence in healthcare workers compared with countries without needlestick safety and prevention regulatory policies. Further studies are needed to develop preventive strategies to protect against NSIs in physicians, which should be incorporated into the standards of care established by national regulatory agencies.

Prevention of needle-stick injury among nurses in an acute ward of a hospital: a best practice implementation project.

This evidence implementation project aimed to identify barriers leading to needle-stick injuries (NSIs) and to develop implementation strategies to prevent NSIs in the acute ward of a hospital in central Taiwan. The incidence rate of NSIs was 5.6% in the acute ward of a hospital in Taiwan. NSIs commonly occur during the drawing of blood, intravenous insertion, needle recapping, or performing any procedure involving sharp medical devices. NSIs are critical occupational risks among healthcare workers, possibly leading to transmission of infectious diseases, especially blood-borne viruses, such as HIV, hepatitis B, and hepatitis C. A clinical audit was undertaken using the JBI Practical Application of Clinical Evidence System (PACES) and the Getting Research into Practice (GRiP) approach. Five audit criteria that represented best practice recommendations for prevention of NSIs were used. Baseline data were collected from 177 nurses in five acute wards, followed by the implementation of multiple strategies during a 20-week period of the project. Both baseline and postimplementation audits were undertaken to determine changes in practice. According to the pre-audit concerning the use of safety-engineered injection devices and safe use and disposal of needles, there was 14-15% compliance, which indicated poor compliance with current best-practice criteria. Following the project implementation, the nursing staff were educated about the well tolerated use and disposal of sharps and the improved compliance rate ranged from 40 to 96.6%, with safety needle use increasing from 16 to 95.5%, safety needle operation procedure awareness increasing from 14 to 96%, needles not recapped after use increasing from 47 to 85%, and placing used needles in the sharps collection box increasing from 75 to 80%. This article suggests that standardized puncture prevention education and training enhanced nurses' awareness in the acute ward.

Experience with Bloodborne Pathogen Exposures Among Operation Room Nurses in Korea: A Qualitative Study

Background: Operation room (OR) nurses are at a high risk for bloodborne pathogen (BBP) exposures because they are constantly in contact with blood and body fluid (BBF) through surgical sites, and they frequently use sharp surgical instruments and sutures during surgeries. We explored occupational experiences with BBP exposures among OR nurses in South Korea. Methods: With an institutional review board’s approval, this qualitative research was performed with 12 OR nurses who had worked for &gt;3 months and had experienced BBP exposures. Based on the main research question “How is the experience of BBP exposure among OR nurses?” the semistructured questions for in-depth interview were prepared. Narrative data were collected through 1-hour individual interviews from June to September 2020 and were analyzed using a thematical analysis method. Results: The average age of the participants was 34.4 years with an average 9.75 years of clinical experience. The main theme extracted was “The nurses are alerted to their safety after experiencing the aftereffects and emotional trauma from BBP exposures,” with 4 subthemes and 14 concepts. The first subtheme, “OR nurses risking exposure to BBF,” included (1) hurried doctors and hasty nurses; (2) sharp surgical instruments everywhere; (3) deprioritized self-protection due to ongoing surgery; (4) inattentive to BBF risk; and (5) uncomfortable, foggy goggles and receded safety devices. The second subtheme, “BBP exposures occurred in a flash,” included (1) sharp injury occurred in a split second; (2) temporarily treat sharp wounds while hiding frightened feelings; and (3) OR nurses concentrated on surgery by suppressing anxiety and sharp wounds. The third subtheme, “Burdened time that could be overwhelmed alone,” included (1) BBP exposures moments that I wish to reverse; (2) anger over dangerous environments and the turmoil of anxiety; (3) exhausted body and facial discoloration due to taking postexposure prophylaxis; and (4) exposure to BBP that I want to hide from family and friends. The fourth subtheme, “Voice for everyone’s safety,” included (1) establishing a safety culture, which requires everyone’s efforts, and (2) necessity of practical resources for decreasing BBP exposures. Conclusions: The participating OR nurses felt that they were working with a high risk to BBF exposures and called for institutional interventions to reduce the risks, including surgeons’ attentive collaboration. Korean hospitals should make greater efforts to establish safety culture in ORs and to provide repeated, tailored education to prevent BBF exposures. They should also supply high-quality protective equipment and safety-engineered devices for OR nurses.Funding: NoDisclosures: None

Frequency of Occupational Bloodborne Infections and Sharps Injuries among Polish Paramedics from Selected Ambulance Stations.

To evaluate the prevalence of bloodborne infections (BBIs) and assess the incidence and selected risk factors for sharps injuries (SIs), a cross-sectional serosurvey was performed between December 2018 and October 2019 among 286 paramedics (76.5% males; mean age, 37 years) from 17 randomly selected ambulance stations in the West Pomeranian region of Poland. An ELISA system was used to detect anti-HBc, anti-HCV, and anti-HIV. HBV vaccination uptake was 95.6%; 7.3% (95% CI: 4.6–11.0%) paramedics were anti-HBc positive, and anti-HCV/anti-HIV seropositivity was not reported. Almost one-fourth of paramedics reported having had ≥1 SI during the preceding year (Me = 6.0, range 1–100). Most recent exposures primarily took place during an emergency procedure (76.7%), in an ambulance (45.2%), caused by hollow-bore needles (73.8%), and were not reported (50.0%). Additionally, 52.2% of paramedics reported needle recapping, and 52.6% did not use safety engineered devices (SEDs) at work. Mean knowledge score was low (2.6 ± 1.7); 3.4% had never participated in infection-control (IC) training, and those not trained were more likely to suffer a SI (odds ratio (OR) 4.64; p = 0.03). Due to frequent SIs, of which half are unreported, paramedics remain at risk of acquiring occupational BBIs. SI risk could be reduced by providing training on IC procedures, ensuring better compliance with safe work practices, and supplying more SEDs.

Causes of Needlestick and Sharps Injuries When Using Devices with and without Safety Features.

Safety-engineered devices (SEDs) have been developed to protect healthcare personnel (HCP) from needlestick and sharps injuries (NSIs). The aim of this study was to analyze NSIs associated with SEDs and non-SEDs among HCP in hospitals, medical offices and care facilities. Records from online questionnaires on NSIs were used. Causes of NSIs were compared for SED use and healthcare setting. A sample of 835 files was included. Injuries with SEDs accounted for 35.0% of all NSIs, whereas the proportions were higher in medical offices and lower in care facilities. NSIs in nurses were more often associated with SEDs than NSIs in physicians. NSIs from intravenous needles were associated with SEDs in more than 60% of cases in hospitals and medical offices and in about 30.0% of cases in care facilities. In contrast, suturing was associated with every fourth NSI in hospitals, of which fewer than 10.0% were associated with SEDs. In care facilities, SEDs were involved in 36.1% of NSIs during subcutaneous injections. NSIs during disposal accounted for 29.2% of total NSIs, of which 36.1% were associated with SEDs. Frequent reasons for SED-associated NSIs were technical problems, unexpected patient movement and problems during disposal. Our analysis shows that many NSIs are associated with SEDs. Continuous training is necessary in the handling and disposal of SEDs.

Needlestick injuries: the role of safety-engineered devices in prevention.

The first documented mention of a needlestick injury (NSI) in the medical literature appeared in 1906. Despite growth in academic and clinical interest for NSI prevention, a global report identified that approximately 3 million healthcare workers have suffered percutaneous exposure to blood-borne pathogens. Legislation is an important component of NSI prevention. Unfortunately, the impact of legislation may not always reduce the incidence of NSI as much as expected. Safety-engineered device (SED) implementation has demonstrated a substantial reduction in NSI rates compared with non-SEDs. More importantly, passive SEDs are 10 times less likely to be connected with an NSI incident.

SAT-672 An Unusual and Enigmatic Etiology for Diabetic Ketoacidosis: Safety Needles

Diabetic ketoacidosis is associated with a mortality rate of upto 6.1% and accounts for an estimated 115000 hospital discharges per year in the United States. In order to reduce mortality related to DKA, precipitating causes must be identified and addressed. The most common precipitant for DKA is infection with other precipitating factors including acute illness, medications and inadequate insulin therapy (1).A 76 year-old woman with type 2 diabetes was transferred from her assisted living facility for hyperglycemia. This was her fifth admission in the last month and a half attributed to either hyperglycemia or DKA. Her medications included insulin glargine and insulin aspart. She mentioned compliance with her insulin as well as her diabetic diet. In the ER, her vitals were stable with physical examination showing an obese woman in no acute distress. Her labs showed a blood glucose of 780, an anion gap of 17 and positive serum ketones. Further investigation did not reveal a source of infection or ischemia. The patient was treated in the ICU with intravenous insulin and fluids with resolution of her ketoacidosis. The patient was discharged with a 67% increase in her prandial insulin. On further review, her facility had recently required safety needles to be used for insulin pens. Patient was asked to demonstrate her technique with observation that patient was not pushing down enough to allow for the needle to enter her skin with subsequent trapping of her insulin within the needle. Prior to discharge, she was educated on proper administration of her insulin and since her discharge, she has had no subsequent readmissions for hyperglycemia.Hospitals and long-term facilities are the primary utilizers of needles with a retractable safety shield. Reduction of accidental puncture, elimination of reuse of needles and helping patients overcome anxiety about needles are some of the key advantages of these needles. Upon application of pressure onto the skin, the automatic shield or plastic cannula retracts and thus hides the needle before, during and after the injection. The major disadvantage is insulin being deployed while the needle is outside the body if incorrectly applied. Therefore, appropriate administration must be taught to the patient, including perpendicular insertion of the needle into the subcutaneous tissue and ensuring a more firm surface by injecting into a lifted skin fold. Legislation in the US has been passed requiring safety-engineered devices when feasible.In situations where the safety-engineered devices can impair effectiveness or cause harm, alternative approaches can be utilized, including insulin syringes or self-administration of insulin along with safe work procedures (1).1. Yu Catherine H.Y.. “Safety” technology: a hidden cause of diabetic ketoacidosis. Canadian Medical Journal Journal. 2012 Mar 20;184(5):557–558.

Education and devices to prevent blood and body fluid exposures.

Healthcare workers are at risk of blood and body fluid exposures (BBFE) while delivering care to patients. Despite recent technological advances such as safety-engineered devices (SEDs), these injuries continue to occur in healthcare facilities worldwide. To assess the impact of an education and SEDs workplace programme on rates of reported exposures. A retrospective cohort study, utilizing interrupted time series analysis to examine reported exposures between 2005 and 2015 at a 600-bed hospital in Perth, Western Australia. The hospital wards were divided into four cohorts. A total of 2223 records were available for analysis. The intervention was most effective for the first cohort, with significant improvements both short-term (reduction of 12 (95% CI 7-17) incidents per 1000 full-time equivalent (FTE) hospital staff) and long-term (reduction of 2 (CI 0.6-4) incidents per 1000 FTE per year). Less significant or consistent impacts were observed for the other three cohorts. Overall, the intervention decreased BBFE exposure rates at the hospital level from 19 (CI 18-20) incidents per 1000 FTE pre-intervention to 11 (CI 10-12) incidents per 1000 FTE post-intervention, a 41% reduction. No exposures resulted in a blood-borne virus infection. The intervention was most effective in reducing exposures at a time when incidence rates were increasing. The overall effect was short-term and did not further reduce an already stabilized trend, which was likely due to improved safety awareness and practice, induced by the first cohort intervention.

Needlestick prevention devices: data from hospital surveillance in Piedmont, Italy—comprehensive analysis on needlestick injuries between healthcare workers after the introduction of safety devices

ObjectiveNeedlestick and sharps injuries (NSIs) involving healthcare workers (HCWs) are worldwide under surveillance since long time; the implementation of the European Directive 32/2010 regarding the mandatory use of safety-engineered devices...