Authors: Thomas, W.J.C.¹; Murray, J.R.D.²

Source: Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England, Volume 91, Number 1, January 2009 , pp. 12-17(6)

Publisher: The Royal College of Surgeons of England

Abstract:

INTRODUCTION: Needle-stick injuries are common. Such accidents are associated with a small, but significant, risk to our career, health, families and not least our patients. National guidelines steer institution-specific strategies to provide a consistent and safe method of dealing with such incidents. Surgeon-specific guidelines are not currently available. We have observed that hospital sharps policy is often considered cumbersome to the surgeon, resulting in on-the-spot decision making with potential long-term implications. By their essence, these decisions are inconsistent, not reproducible and, thus, we believe them to be unsafe. The under-reporting to occupational health departments is well documented. Current surgical practice has the potential to expose the surgeon to unnecessary risk. The aims of this study were to establish the true incidence of contaminations caused by needle-stick injury in our hospital and to assess how well current protocols are really implemented.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We identified all surgeons of consultant, non-career staff grade (NCSG) and registrar grade working in a large 687-bed district general hospital serving a population of 550,000, in the UK. We designed a retrospective, anonymous 30-second survey. Surgeons' awareness and opinion of local policy was sought in a free-text section.

RESULTS: Of the 98 surgeons in the hospital, 77% responded to the questionnaire and 44% anonymously admitted to having a needle-stick injury. Only 3 of the 33 (9%) who sustained an needle-stick injury said that they followed the agreed local policy. Twenty-three surgeons (70%) performed first aid type procedures such as informing scrub nurse, changing needle and gloves. Seven surgeons (21%) simply ignored the incident and continued. Forty-three surgeons commented on the policy's nature with only 9 who regarded it as 'user friendly'.

CONCLUSIONS: Needle-stick injury is still a common problem, particularly in the surgical cohort and remains significantly under-reported. The disparity between hospital sharps policy and actual surgical practice is considered and an explanation for the difference sought. Without this awareness of 'real-life' surgical practice, the occupational health figures for sharps injury will always tell a rosy story under-estimating a real problem. We strongly advocate universal precautions in the operating theatre. However, we acknowledge that sharps injuries will occur. We should remain vigilant and act upon contaminations without surgical bravado but with mater-of-fact professionalism. This includes regular review of policy and, particularly, promotion of surgical awareness.

References: 6 references open in new window

Articles that cite this article?

Keywords: NEEDLE-STICK INJURY; SHARPS INJURY; SURGICAL CONTAMINATION; BLOOD-BORNE VIRUSES; REPORTING RATES

Document Type: Research article

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1308/003588409X359213

Affiliations: 1: Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Royal United Hospital, Bath, UK 2: Avon Orthopaedic Centre, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK

Publication date: 2009-01-01

More about this publication?

• The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England is the official journal of the College and is published eight times a year in January, March, April, May, July, September, October and November. The main aim of the journal is to publish high quality, peer-reviewed papers that relate to all branches of surgery.
  
  The Annals also includes letters and comments, a regular technical section, NICE news, controversial topics, CORESS feedback, book reviews and the best trainee presentations from England and Wales. The editorial board is composed of members of the College Council and experts from across the surgical specialties.
  
  Archive issues of the Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England are available via the PubMed Central database
  
  To view articles that have been published online ahead of print please click here
• Information for Authors
• Subscribe to this Title
• Information for Advertisers
• The journals of importance to UK clinicians - Survey
• ingentaconnect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites

Related content

• In this: publication
• By this: publisher
• In this Subject: Medicine ,  Surgery ,  Education
• By this author: Thomas, W.J.C. ;  Murray, J.R.D.

Website © Publishing Technology. Article copyright remains with the publisher, society or author(s) as specified within the article.

• Terms and conditions
• Privacy policy
• Information for advertisers