EXPOSURE TO BLOOD DURING VARIOUS PROCEDURES - RESULTS OF 2 SURVEYS BEFORE AND AFTER THE IMPLEMENTATION OF UNIVERSAL PRECAUTIONS

被引：30

作者：

SAGHAFI, L ^{[1
]}

RASELLI, P ^{[1
]}

FRANCILLON, C ^{[1
]}

FRANCIOLI, P ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] CHU VAUDOIS,DIV AUTONOME MED PREVENT HOSP,CH-1011 LAUSANNE,SWITZERLAND

来源：

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INFECTION CONTROL | 1992年 / 20卷 / 02期

关键词：

D O I：

10.1016/S0196-6553(05)80001-X

中图分类号：

R1 [预防医学、卫生学];

学科分类号：

1004 ; 120402 ;

摘要：

In an attempt to define better situations involving exposure to blood, we surveyed nurses (N = 565) in a 1000-bed university hospital to determine the following for the last working shift: the rate of cutaneous exposure to blood for different procedures, the rate of needlestick injury, and the prevalence of hand lesions. Among nurses who had performed at least one of the specified procedures, 42% had been exposed to blood with unprotected skin. Direct examination of 100 pairs of hands revealed that 57% of the nurses had either acute or chronic skin lesions. Universal precautions were introduced, and a similar survey (N = 541) was carried out 1 year later to assess compliance. Exposure of unprotected skin to blood had been reduced to 27%, although 46% of nurses had not used gloves for any of the procedures they had performed. The main reason given by nurses for not wearing gloves was that they did not consider the patient to be at risk for carrying a blood-borne infection. The rate of needlestick injuries was high and had remained stable at approximately 2.8 needlesticks/nurse per year, as determined by information from the last working shifts. We conclude that compliance of nursing personnel with universal precautions was insufficient, despite an informational campaign throughout the hospital. Repeated instruction on barrier precautions and the prevention of needlestick injury (including the correct use of disposable containers) is necessary to ensure optimal protection.

引用

页码：53 / 57

页数：5

共 14 条

[1] Centers for Disease Control, Recommendations for preventing transmission of infection with human T-lymphotropic virus type III/lymphadenopathy-associated virus in the workplace, MMWR, 34, pp. 681-686, (1985)
[2] Centers for Disease Control, Recommendations for preventing transmission of infection with human T-lymphotropic virus type III/lymphadenopathy-associated virus in the workplace, MMWR, 34, pp. 691-695, (1985)
[3] Marcus, Surveillance of health care workers exposed to blood from patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus, N Engl J Med, 319, pp. 1118-1123, (1988)
[4] Henderson, HIV-1 in the healthcare setting, Principles and practice of infectious diseases, pp. 2221-2236, (1990)
[5] Beekmann, Fahey, Gerberding, Henderson, Risky business: using necessarily imprecise casualty counts to estimate occupational risks for HIV-1 infection, Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol, 11, pp. 371-379, (1990)
[6] European Centre for the Epidemiological Monitoring of AIDS, AIDS surveillance in Europe: quarterly report no 27, (1990)
[7] Kelen, DiGiovanna, Bisson, Kalainov, Sivertson, Quinn, Human immunodeficiency virus infection in emergency department patients: epidemiology, clinical presentations and risk to health care workers—the Johns Hopkins experience, JAMA, 262, pp. 516-522, (1989)
[8] Hammond, Eckes, Gomez, Cunningham, HIV, trauma, and infection control: universal precautions are universally ignored, J Trauma, 30, pp. 555-558, (1990)
[9] McCormick, Maki, Epidemiology of needle-stick injuries in hospital personnel, Am J Med, 70, pp. 928-932, (1981)
[10] Neuberger, Harris, Kundin, Bischone, Chin, Incidence of needlestick injuries in hospital personnel: implications for prevention, Am J Infect Control, 12, pp. 171-176, (1984)

← 1 2 →