Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T11:39:50.424Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Changing Needle Disposal Systems on Needle Puncture Injuries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Keith Krasinski ,
Rita LaCouture  and
Robert S. Holzman
Keith Krasinski*
Affiliation:
Departments of Pediatrics and Medicine, New York University School of Medicineand the Division of Nursing, Bellevue Hospital Center, New York, New York
Rita LaCouture
Affiliation:
Departments of Pediatrics and Medicine, New York University School of Medicineand the Division of Nursing, Bellevue Hospital Center, New York, New York
Robert S. Holzman
Affiliation:
Departments of Pediatrics and Medicine, New York University School of Medicineand the Division of Nursing, Bellevue Hospital Center, New York, New York
*
Department of Pediatrics, New York University Medical Center, 550 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Accidental needle puncture injuries continue to pose a hazard to hospital workers. In order to reduce the number of such injuries in our hospital, needle disposal procedures were revised to discourage recapping and prevent bending or clipping of needles before discard. Collapsible cardboard boxes were replaced with impervious containers. An educational program accompanied these changes. We compared reports of needlestick injuries before and after the change of procedure, for three parallel 9-month periods. During the 27-month study, injuries occurred during administration of medication (22%), or recapping of used needles (16%), from needles protruding through (10%) or out of the "mouth" (9%) of the container, from needles left in the patient's environment (10%), or those left on procedure trays (7%). Seven percent were the result of being stuck by someone else, usually in the operating room. The mechanism of injury for 19% was not, described. Altering the disposal procedures did not change the number or anatomic site of injuries, nor the risk of injury among the various job categories. A reduction in the rate of sticks from needles protruding through the container (1.3 vs 0.3/mo, p≤0.005) was the only difference observed. Changing the needle receptacle changed the type but not the overall number of injuries. The education program had little effect on the number and types of injuries. These data point to the need for developing innovative approaches for eliciting changes in behavior of health care personnel.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , February 1987 , pp. 59 - 62
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.McCormick, RD, Maki, DG: Epidemiology of needle-stick injuries in hospital personnel. Am J Med 1981; 70:928–932.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Bock, KB, Tong, MJ, Bernstein, S: The risk of accidental exposure to hepatitis B virus via blood contamination in medical students. J Infect Dis 1981; 144:604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Seef, LB, Wright, EC, Zimmerman, HJ, et al: Type B hepatitis after needle-stick exposure: Prevention with HBIG. Final Report of the VA cooperative study. Ann Intern Med 1978; 88:285–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Needle stick transmission of HTLV-III from a patient infected in Africa. Lancet 1984; 1:1376.Google Scholar
5.Wormser, GP, Joline, C, Duncanson, F, et al: Needlestick injuries during care of patients with AIDS. N Engl J Med 1984; 310:1461.Google ScholarPubMed
6.Hirsch, MS, Wormser, GP, Schooley, R, et al: Risk of transmission of HTLV-III by needle stick (letter). N Engl J Med 1985; 312:1129.Google Scholar
7.Ruben, FL, Norden, CW, Rockwell, K, et al: Epidemiology of accidental needle-puncture wounds in hospital workers. Am J Med Sci 1983; 286:26–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Neuberger, JS, Harris, JA, Kundin, WD, et al: Incidence of needlestick injuries in hospital personnel. Am J Infect Control 1984; 12:171–176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Jacobson, JT, Burke, JP, Conti, MT: Injuries of hospital employees from needles and other sharp objects. Infect Control 1983; 4:100–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Reed, JS, Anderson, AC, Hodges, GR: Needlestick and puncture wounds: Definition of the problem. Am J Infect Control 1980; 8:101–106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Garner, JS, Simmons, BP: Centers for Disease Control: Guidelines for isolation precautions in hospitals. Infect Control 1983; 4:245–325.Google Scholar
12.Williams, WW: Centers for Disease Control: Guidelines for infection control in hospital personnel. Infect Control 1983; 4:326–349.Google Scholar
13.Fishman, M, Cathers, AF, Stamp, D: Brief report: Needle puncture—documentation and incidence rate calculation. Infect Control 1985; 6:35–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Sumner, W: Needlecaps to prevent needlestick injuries. Infect Control 1985; 6:495–497.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed