Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-23T08:46:23.613Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Risk of Exposure to Bloodborne Infection for Italian Healthcare Workers, by Job Category and Work Area

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Vincenzo Puro ,
Gabriella De Carli ,
Nicola Petrosillo ,
Giuseppe Ippolito  and
Studio Italiano Rischio Occupazionale da HIV Group
Vincenzo Puro*
Affiliation:
Centro di Riferimento AIDS e Servizio di Epidemiologia delle Malattie Infettive, National Institute for Infectious Diseases, —IRCCS Lazzaro Spallanzani, Rome, Italy
Gabriella De Carli
Affiliation:
Centro di Riferimento AIDS e Servizio di Epidemiologia delle Malattie Infettive, National Institute for Infectious Diseases, —IRCCS Lazzaro Spallanzani, Rome, Italy
Nicola Petrosillo
Affiliation:
Centro di Riferimento AIDS e Servizio di Epidemiologia delle Malattie Infettive, National Institute for Infectious Diseases, —IRCCS Lazzaro Spallanzani, Rome, Italy
Giuseppe Ippolito
Affiliation:
Centro di Riferimento AIDS e Servizio di Epidemiologia delle Malattie Infettive, National Institute for Infectious Diseases, —IRCCS Lazzaro Spallanzani, Rome, Italy
*
Centro di Riferimento AIDS e Servizio di Epidemiologia delle Malattie Infettive, Istituto Nazionale per le Malattie Infettive “Lazzaro Spallanzani”, —IRCCS, Via Portuense 292, 00149 Roma, Italy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

To analyze the rate of occupational exposure to blood and body fluids from all sources and specifically from human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected sources among hospital workers, by job category and work area.

Design:

Multicenter prospective study. Occupational exposure data (numerator) and full-time equivalents ([FTEs] denominator) were collected over a 5-year period (1994-1998) and analyzed.

Setting:

18 Italian urban acute-care hospitals with infectious disease units.

Results:

A total of 10,988 percutaneous and 3,361 mucocutaneous exposures were reported. The highest rate of percutaneous exposure per 100 FTEs was observed among general surgery (11%) and general medicine (10.6%) nurses, the lowest among infectious diseases (1.1%) and laboratory (1%) physicians. The highest rates of mucocutaneous exposure were observed among midwives (5.3%) and dialysis nurses (4.7%), the lowest among pathologists (0%). Inadequate sharps disposal and the prevalence of sharps in the working unit influence the risk to housekeepers. The highest combined HIV exposure rates were observed among nurses (7.8%) and physicians (1.9%) working in infectious disease units. The highest rates of high-risk percutaneous exposures per 100 FTE were again observed in nurses regardless of work area, but this risk was higher in medical areas than in surgery (odds ratio, 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.9-2.5; P<.0001).

Conclusion:

Exposure risk is related to job tasks, as well as to the type and complexity of care provided in different areas, whereas HIV exposure risk mainly relates to the prevalence of HIV-infected patients in a specific area. The number of accident-prone procedures, especially those involving the use of hollow-bore needles, performed by job category influence the rate of exposure with high risk of infection. Job- and area-specific exposure rates permit monitoring of the effectiveness of targeted interventions and control measures over time.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , April 2001 , pp. 206 - 210
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2001

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. Ippolito, G, Puro, V, Heptonstall, J, Jagger, J, De Carli, G, Petrosillo, N. Occupational human immunodeficiency virus infection in health care workers: worldwide cases through September 1997. Clin Infect Dis 1999;28:365–383.Google Scholar
2. Ippolito, G, Puro, V, De Carli, G. The risk of occupational human immuno-deficiency virus infection in health care workers: Italian multicenter study. Arch Intern Med 1993;153:1451–1458.Google Scholar
3. Ippolito, G, Puro, V, Petrosillo, N, De Carli, G, the Studio Italiano Rischio Occupazionale da HIV (SIROH) group. Surveillance of occupational exposure to bloodborne pathogens in health care workers: the Italian national programme. Eurosurveillance 1999;4:33–36.Google Scholar
4. McGeer, A, Simor, AE, Low, DE. Epidemiology of needlestick injuries in house officers. J Infect Dis 1990;162:961–964.Google Scholar
5. Raviglione, MC, Battan, R, Garner, G, Cortes, H, Sugar, J, Taranta, A. Risk of exposure to HIV-infected body fluids among medical housestaff. AIDS Patient Care 1992;6:52–55.Google Scholar
6. Shen, C, Jagger, J, Pearson, RD. Risk of needle stick and sharp object injuries among medical students. Am J Infect Control 1999;27:435–437.Google Scholar
7. Tereskerz, PM, Pearson, RD, Jagger, J. Occupational exposure to blood among medical students. N Engl J Med 1996;335:1150–1153.Google Scholar
8. 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;337:1485–1490.Google Scholar
9. Albertoni, F, Ippolito, G, Petrosillo, N, Sommella, L, Di Nardo, V, Ricci, C, et al. Needlestick injury in hospital personnel: a multicenter survey from central Italy. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1992;13:540–544.Google Scholar
10. Pace, G, Sani, P, Paolucci, S. Analisi delle Precauzioni Universali: individuazione dei punti critici fondamentali e lore impatto nell'attività quoudiana. Quaderni ANIPIO 1995;3:41–48.Google Scholar
11. De Carli, G, Puro, V, Petrosillo, N, Ippolito, G, Studio Italiano Rischio Occupazionale da HIV (SIROH) group. “Side” effects of HAART: decreasing and changing occupational exposure to HIV-infected patients. J Biol Reg Homeos Ag. In press.Google Scholar
12. Mansour, AM. Which physicians are at high risk for needlestick injuries? Am J Infect Control 1990;18:208–210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. McCormick, RD, Meisch, MG, Ircink, FG, Maki, DG. Epidemiology of hospital sharps injuries: a 14-year prospective study in the pre-AIDS and AIDS eras. Am J Med 1991;91(suppl 3B):301S–307S.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Beekmann, SE, Vlahov, D, Koziol, DE, McShalley, ED, Schmitt, JM, Henderson, DK. Temporal association between implementation of Universal Precautions and a sustained, progressive decrease in percutaneous exposures to blood. Clin Infect Dis 1994;18:562–569.Google Scholar
15. Nelsing, S, Nielsen, TL, Ole Nielsen, J. Occupational blood exposure among health care workers, I: frequency and reporting. Scand J Infect Dis 1993;25:193–198.Google Scholar
16. Luthi, JC, Dubois-Arber, F, Iten, A, Maziero, A, Colombo, C, Jost, J, et al. The occurrence of percutaneous injuries to health care workers: a cross sectional survey in seven Swiss hospitals. Schweiz Med Wochenschr 1998;128:536–543.Google Scholar
17. Sellick, JA, Hazamy, PA, Mylotte, JM. Influence of an educational program and mechanical opening needle disposal boxes on occupational needlestick injuries. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1991;12:725–731.Google Scholar
18. Haiduven, DJ, DeMaio, TM, Stevens, DA. A five-years study of needlestick injuries: significant reduction associated with communication, education, and convenient placement of sharps containers. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1992;13:265–271.Google Scholar
19. Linnemann, CC, Cannon, C, DeRonde, M, Lamphear, B. Effect of educational programs, rigid sharps containers, and Universal Precautions on reported needlestick injuries in health care workers. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1991;12:214–219.Google Scholar
20. Mast, ST, Woolwine, JD, Gerberding, JL. Efficacy of gloves in reducing blood volumes transferred during simulated needlestick injury. J Infect Dis 1993;168:1589–1592.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 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. MMWR 1997;46:21–25.Google Scholar
22. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Evaluation of blunt suture needles in preventing percutaneous injuries among health care workers during gynecologic surgical procedures—New York City, March 1993-June 1994. MMWR 1997;46:25–29.Google Scholar
23. Roudot-Thoraval, F, Montagne, O, Schaeffer, A, Dubreuil-Lemaire, ML, Hachard, D, Durand-Zaleski, I. Costs and benefits of measures to prevent needlestick injuries in a university hospital. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999;20:614–617.Google Scholar
24. Ippolito, G, Puro, V, Petrosillo, N, Pugliese, G, Wispelwey, B, Tereskerz, PM, et al. Prevention, Management and Chemoprophylaxis of Occupational Exposure to HIV. Charlottesville, VA: International Health Care Worker Safety Center Editor; 1997.Google Scholar
25. Orenstein, R, Reynolds, L, Karabaic, M, Lamb, A, Markowitz, SM. Do protective devices prevent needlestick injuries among health care workers? Am J Infect Control 1995;23:344–351.Google Scholar
26. Russo, PL, Harrington, GA, Spelman, DW. Needleless intravenous systems: a review. Am J Infect Control 1999;27:431–434.Google Scholar
27. DeJoy, DM, Searcy, CA, Murphy, RR, Gershon, RR. Behavioral-diagnostic analysis of compliance with universal precaution among nurses. J Occup Health Psychol 2000;5:127–141.Google Scholar