DETERMINANTS OF EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT PROCEDURE-SPECIFIC AND CONDITION-SPECIFIC UNIVERSAL (BARRIER) PRECAUTION REQUIREMENTS FOR OPTIMAL PROVIDER PROTECTION

被引:11
作者
KELEN, GD
HANSEN, KN
GREEN, GB
TANG, N
GANGULI, C
机构
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0196-0644(95)70201-6
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Study objective: To determine potential blood and body fluid (B/BF) contacts with specific body areas associated with procedures commonly performed in the emergency department and to thereby delineate appropriate procedure-specific precautions. Design: Prospective, observational study assessing procedure-related B/BF contacts by use of stratified, blocked sampling of shifts. Participants: ED patients in an inner-city tertiary care university hospital. Results: Of 2,529 procedures performed in 1,025 patients, 1,621 (64%) were associated with barrier-protected or unprotected B/BF contact; 92% involved blood or bloody BF. Chest tube placement, lumbar puncture, and examination of the bleeding patient all resulted in B/BF contact with the facial area. All of the 18 procedure categories observed, with the exception of IM injection, resulted in B/BF contact with hands. Many procedures resulted in contact with the body or feet. Procedure type, provider, length of time, number of procedures per patient, and successful completion were each independently associated with B/BF contact. Number of attempts, adverse conditions, and triage acuteness were not associated with increased likelihood of contact. Conclusion: Virtually all ED procedures require gloves. Barrier protection for the body may be appropriate for all but the simplest procedures. Protection for the face seems appropriate, especially in invasive procedures such as lumbar puncture or physical examination of the bleeding patient. This study, along with other published data, has aided development of detailed guidelines for appropriate barrier precautions to be taken for common ED procedures.
引用
收藏
页码:743 / 750
页数:8
相关论文
共 23 条
[1]  
Report to the chairman, Subcommittee on Health for Families and the Uninsured, Committee on Finance, US Senate: Emergency Departments: Unevenly Affected by Growth and Change in Patient Use, pp. 2-72, (1993)
[2]  
Kelen, DiGiovanna, Celentano, Et al., Adherence to universal (barrier) precautions during interventions on critically ill and injured emergency department patients, JAIDS, 3, pp. 987-994, (1990)
[3]  
Kelen, DiGiovanna, Bisson, Et al., Human immunodeficiency virus infection in emergency patients: Epidemiology, clinical presentations, and risk to health care workers: The Johns Hopkins experience, JAMA, 262, pp. 516-522, (1989)
[4]  
Lewandowski, Ognjan, Rivers, Et al., HIV-1 and HTLV-1 seroprevalence in critically ill resuscitated emergency department patients, (1989)
[5]  
Marcus, Culver, Bell, Et al., Risk of human immunodeficiency virus infection among emergency department workers, Am J Med, 94, pp. 363-370, (1993)
[6]  
Schoenbaum, Webber, The underrecognition of HIV infection in women in an inner-city emergency room, Am J Public Health, 83, pp. 363-368, (1993)
[7]  
Baraff, Talan, Torres, Prevalence of HIV antibody in a noninner-city university hospital emergency department, Ann Emerg Med, 20, pp. 782-786, (1991)
[8]  
Rhee, Albertson, Kizer, Et al., The HIV-1 seroprevalence rate of injured patients admitted through California emergency departments, Ann Emerg Med, 20, pp. 969-972, (1991)
[9]  
Centers for Disease Control, Recommendations for preventing transmission of infection with human T-lymphadenopathy-associated virus during invasive procedures, MMWR, 35, pp. 221-222, (1985)
[10]  
Centers for Disease Control, Recommendations for protection against viral hepatitis, MMWR, 34, pp. 313-335, (1985)