Evaluation of safety devices for preventing percutaneous injuries among health-care workers during phlebotomy procedures--Minneapolis-St. Paul, New York City, and San Francisco, 1993-1995.

Health-care workers (HCWs) are at risk for infections with bloodborne pathogens resulting from occupational exposures to blood through percutaneous injuries (PIs). Phlebotomy, one of the most commonly performed medical procedures, has been associated with 13% - 62% of injuries reported to hospital occupational health services and 20 (39%) of the 51 documented episodes of occupationally acquired human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection reported in the United States (CDC, unpublished data, 1996). Although safety devices designed to prevent PIs associated with phlebotomy have been available for use in the United States, clinical evaluation of these devices has been difficult because 1) ascertainment of PIs is difficult (many injuries are unreported, and observation of all procedures is impractical because phlebotomy is performed throughout the hospital by different groups of HCWs at all hours), 2) data to calculate PI rates (i.e., the number of phlebotomies performed and devices used) are not routinely available, 3) a large number of phlebotomies must be evaluated because of the low rates of phlebotomy-related PI and 4) rates of safety-feature activation are difficult to assess. This report summarizes a collaborative study by CDC and six hospitals to evaluate safety devices for phlebotomy. The findings indicate that use of safety devices significantly reduced phlebotomy-related PI rates while having minimal clinically apparent adverse effects on patient care.

[1]  H. Hallander,et al.  A controlled trial of a two-component acellular, a five-component acellular, and a whole-cell pertussis vaccine. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  D Greco,et al.  A controlled trial of two acellular vaccines and one whole-cell vaccine against pertussis. Progetto Pertosse Working Group. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  L. Chiarello Selection of needlestick prevention devices: a conceptual framework for approaching product evaluation. , 1995, American journal of infection control.

[4]  W. Blackwelder,et al.  A placebo-controlled trial of a pertussis-toxoid vaccine. , 1995, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  L. J. Short,et al.  Risk of occupational infection with blood-borne pathogens in operating and delivery room settings. , 1993, American journal of infection control.

[6]  D. Raoult,et al.  Epidemiologic features and clinical presentation of acute Q fever in hospitalized patients: 323 French cases. , 1992, The American journal of medicine.

[7]  B. Farber,et al.  Percutaneous injuries during surgical procedures. , 1992, JAMA.

[8]  R. D. McCormick,et al.  Epidemiology of hospital sharps injuries: a 14-year prospective study in the pre-AIDS and AIDS eras. , 1991, The American journal of medicine.

[9]  R. Farias-Eisner,et al.  Blunt needles in fascial closure. , 1991, Surgery, gynecology & obstetrics.

[10]  D. Low,et al.  Epidemiology of needlestick injuries in house officers. , 1990, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[11]  R. Pearson,et al.  Rates of needle-stick injury caused by various devices in a university hospital. , 1988, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  B. Hamory,et al.  Underreporting of needlestick injuries in a university hospital. , 1983, American journal of infection control.

[13]  E. H. Lennette,et al.  AIR‐BORNE TRANSMISSION OF Q FEVER: THE ROLE OF PARTURITION IN THE GENERATION OF INFECTIVE AEROSOLS , 1958, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.