Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/HTML-CSS/fonts/TeX/fontdata.js

Journal List > Korean J Nosocomial Infect Control > v.20(1) > 1098350

TOOLS
Ihn, Jae, Jun, Jeong, Sun, Su, Seung, Jeong, and Ju: Prospective and Retrospective Incidence and Post-exposure Reporting of Needlestick Injuries
Original Article

J Nosocomial Infect Control 2013;20(1):29-36.

Published online: 3 May 2013

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14192/kjnic.2015.20.1.29

Prospective and Retrospective Incidence and Post-exposure Reporting of Needlestick Injuries

Sook Jeong Ihn, Sim Jeong Jae, Seok Sohn Jun, Hwa Choi Jeong, Young Jeong Sun, Ha Han Su, Mae Choi Seung, A Youn Jeong, Yeon Song Ju

1College of Nursing, Pusan National University, Busan, Korea

2Department of Nursing, Ulsan University, Ulsan, Korea

3Changwon Samsung Hospital, Changwon, Korea

4Infection Control Unit, Kunkuk University Hospital, Seoul, Korea

5Department of Nursing, Konyang University, Daejeon, Korea

6Infection Control Unit, Soon Chun Hyang University Hospital, Bucheon, Korea

7Infection Control Unit, Haeundae Paik Hospital, Busan, Korea

8Health Care Unit, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan, Korea

9Infection Control Unit, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan, Korea

Address reprint requests to Ihn Sook Jeong, College of Nursing, Pusan National University, 49, Busandaehak-ro, Mulgeum-eup, Yangsan 626-870, Korea Tel: 051-510-8342, Fax: 051-510-830 E-mail: jeongis@pusan.ac.kr

Received 1 April 2015       Accepted 16 June 2015

Copyright © 2013, the Korean Thyroid Association. All rights reserved.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Background

Most studies on the incidence rate (IR) and post-exposure reporting rate (RR) of needle-stick injuries (NSIs) were performed using retrospective surveillance, which is vulnerable to recall bias. This study aimed to identify the agreement between IRs and RRs obtained from prospective and retrospective surveillance.

Methods

The prospective surveillance was performed with 716 nurses working at 3 hospitals from August to September in 2012. They prospectively reported when they experienced the NSIs, and the investigator retrospectively calculated the RR from records in the infection control unit or health care unit during the same periods when they reported the number of NSIs. The retrospective surveillance was carried out with 312 nurses who participated in the prospective surveillance. They retrospectively answered the question on the number of NSIs and post-exposure reporting after recalling the experienced NSI from August to September in 2012.

Results

The IR of NSIs was 9.8 per 100 nurses by the prospective surveillance and 36.4 per 100 nurses by the retrospective surveillance, which was statistically significantly different (Pä0.001). The RR of NSIs was 14.3% by the prospective surveillance and 8.5% by the retrospective surveillance, which was not statistically significantly different.

Conclusion

We recommend using a prospective approach for calculating the IR of NSIs to reduce the risk of recall bias. However, the RR of NSIs can be calculated using both prospective and retrospective approaches.

Go to : Goto

Keywords: Bias, Incident Reporting, Memory, Needle-Stick Injuries, Prospective Studies, Retrospective Studies

References

1. Perry J, Parker G, Jagger J. EPINet report: 2007 percutaneous injury rates.International healthcare worker safety center. 2009; http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/pub/epinet/epinet-2007-rates.pdf.
2. Sepkowitz KA. Occupationally acquired infections in health care workers. Part II.Ann Intern Med. 1996; 125:917–28.
3. Gerberding JL. Management of occupational exposures to blood-borne viruses. N Engl J Med. 1995; 332:444–51.
crossref
4. Occupational Safety and Health Administration.Medical & dental offices: a guide to compliance with OSHA Standards (OSHA 3187-09R). https://www.osha.gov/Publications/OSHA3187/osha3187.html.
5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).Updated US.Public Health Service guidelines for the management of occupational exposures to HBV, HCV, and HIV and recommendations for postexposure prophylaxis. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2001; 50:1–42.
6. Mast EE, Weinbaum CM, Fiore AE, Alter MJ, Bell BP, Finelli L, Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)., et alA comprehensive immunization strategy to eliminate transmission of hepatitis B virus infection in the United States: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) Part II: immunization of adults. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2006; 55:1–33.
7. Cardo DM, Culver DH, Ciesielski CA, Srivastava PU, Marcus R, Abiteboul D, et al. A case-control study of HIV seroconversion in health care workers after percutaneous exposure. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Needlestick Surveillance Group. N Engl J Med. 1997; 337:1485–90.
8. Ministry of Government Legislation.Occupational safety and health act. Ministry of Labor. 2007; http://www.law.go.kr/lsSc.do?menuId=0&subMenu=1&query=%EC%82%B0%EC%97%85%EC%95%88%EC%A0%84%EB%B3%B4%EA%B1%B4%EB%B2%95#liBgcolor0.
9. Ministry of Health and Welfare.Nosocomial infection prevention and control guideline. Seoul: Ministry of Health and Welfare. 2005.
10. Seo JM, Jeong IS. Post-exposure reporting of needlestick and sharp-object injuries among nurses. Korean J Nosocomial Infect Control. 2010; 15:26–35.
11. Kim OS, Jeong JS, Kim KM, Choi JS, Jeong IS, Park ES, et al. Underreporting rate and related factors after needlestick injuries among healthcare workers in small- or medium-sized hospitals. Korean J Nosocomial Infect Control. 2011; 16:29–36.
12. Lee LK, Hassim IN. Implication of the prevalence of needlestick injuries in a general hospital in Malaysia and its risk in clinical practice. Environ Health Prev Med. 2005; 10:33–41.
crossref
13. Shokuhi SH, Gachkar L, Alavi-Darazam I, Yuhanaee P, Sajadi M. Occupational Exposure to Blood and Body Fluids among Health Care Workers in Teaching Hospitals in Tehran, Iran. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2012; 14:402–7.
14. Honda M, Chompikul J, Rattanapan C, Wood G, Klungboonkrong S. Sharps injuries among nurses in a Thai regional hospital: prevalence and risk factors. Int J Occup Environ Med. 2011; 2:215–23.
15. Simon LP. Prevention and management of needlestick injury in Delhi. Br J Nurs. 2009; 18:252–6.
16. Smith DR, Muto T, Sairenchi T, Ishikawa Y, Sayama S, Yoshida A, et al. Hospital safety climate, psychosocial risk factors and needlestick injuries in Japan. Ind Health. 2010; 48:85–95.
crossref
17. de Castro AB, Cabrera SL, Gee GC, Fujishiro K, Tagalog EA. Occupational health and safety issues among nurses in the Philippines. AAOHN J. 2009; 57:149–57.
crossref
18. Chakravarthy M, Singh S, Arora A, Sengupta S, Munshi N. The EPInet data of four Indian hospitals on incidence of exposure of healthcare workers to blood and body fluid: a multicentric prospective analysis. Indian J Med Sci. 2010; 64:540–8.
crossref
19. Laramie AK, Pun VC, Fang SC, Kriebel D, Davis L. Sharps injuries among employees of acute care hospitals in Massachusetts, 2002-2007. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011; 32:538–44.
crossref
20. Jeong JS. Development and administration of needlestick injury surveillance system for healthcare personnel. Ulsan: Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency. 2011.
21. Venier AG, Vincent A, L’heriteau F, Floret N, Senechal H, Abiteboul D, et al. Surveillance of occupational blood and body fluid exposures among French healthcare workers in 2004. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2007; 28:1196–201.
crossref
Go to : Goto

Table 1.
Characteristics of study participants
Institution No. of beds August September
No. of ward No. of ICU No. of nurses No. of nurse days No. of ward No. of ICU No. of nurses No. of nurse days
A 878 4 1 95 1.567 3 1 79 1,461
B 857 4 2 127 2,264 4 2 129 2,193
C 909 4 2 142 2,646 4 2 142 2,583
Total 2,644 12 5 364 6,477 11 5 350 6,237

Abbreviations: No, number; ICU, intensive care unit.

Table 2.
Prospective and retrospective incidence and reporting of needle-stick injuries
Total Institution
A B C
Prospective data collection
Incidence rate (IR)
No. of nurses for 2 months 716 176 256 284
Incidence of NSI for 2 months 70 40 16 14
IR (per 100 nurses) 9.8 22.7 6.3 4.9
Incidence density (ID)
No. of nurse-days for 2 months 12,714 3,028 4,457 5,229
Incidence of NSI for 2 months 70 40 16 14
ID (per 1000 nurse-days) 5.5 13.2 3.6 2.7
Reporting rate (RR)
No. of NSI reported for 2 months 10 8 1 1
RR (%) 14.3 20.0 6.3 7.1
Retrospective data collection
Incidence rate (IR)
No. of participants 321 78 103 140
Incidence of NSI for 2 months 117 61 23 33
IR (per 100 nurses) 36.4 78.2 22.3 23.6
Reporting rate (RR)
No. of NSI reported for 2 months 15 6 1 8
RR (%) 8.5 9.8 4.3 24.2
Compare prospective and retrospective data collection
Incidence rate (IR) X2=106.67, P?0.001
Reporting rate (RR) X2=0.08, P=0.776

Abbreviation: No, number.

TOOLS
Similar articles