IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i18p11315-d910326.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Non-Safety and Safety Device Sharp Injuries—Risk of Incidents, SEDs Availability, Attitudes and Perceptions of Nurses According to Cross-Sectional Survey in Poland

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Garus-Pakowska

    (Department of Nutrition and Epidemiology, Medical University of Łódź, 90-752 Łódź, Poland)

  • Mariusz Górajski

    (Faculty of Economics and Sociology, Department of Econometrics, University of Łódź, 90-214 Łódź, Poland)

  • Piotr Sakowski

    (IKM Pro Sakowska, Michałowska, Łyszkiewicz sp.j., 90-132 Łódź, Poland)

Abstract

Sharp injuries are a serious issue among healthcare workers (HCWs). The aim of the study was to examine the frequency of sharps injuries among nurses (who have the most frequent contact with infectious material) when using devices with and without safety features, then to analyse the factors associated with such injuries and to compare the risk of injuries with safety engineered devices (SEDs) and non-safety engineered devices (non-SEDs). An online cross-sectional survey was completed between October 2021 and March 2022 by 280 nurses. The incidence of exposure to sharp injury during their professional life was 51.4%. The percentage of nurses experiencing a sharp injury in the year preceding the study was 29% and 9.6% for superficially and deep injury, respectively. Ampoules and conventional hollow-bore needles caused the most injuries (25.92% and 22.64% of nurses in the last year). Factors including sex (males), age and seniority (elderly), education (higher), work exhaustion and being left-handed were associated with the occurrence of conventional hollow-bore needle injuries. In the case of SEDs: age, seniority and right/left-handed were the most frequent risk factors associated with the occurrence of sharp injuries. SEDs injuries were much less frequent than non-SEDs. There was a significant difference between the risk of injuries with safety and non-safety needles, central cannulas and ampoules. Fisher’s exact test ( p -value = 0.000) and positive Spearman’s rho statistics (0.2319, p -value = 0.0001) confirmed that in accredited hospitals, the availability of safety needles was higher. Almost half of the nurses ( n = 115, 41.07%) stated that staff had little influence on the type of medical sharp instruments supplied. To reduce the risk of nurse injuries, access to medical devices with safe protection mechanisms should be ensured, the use of sharp instruments should be limited where possible, managers should consult nurses regarding the choice of safe devices, and training programs on the proper use of SEDs should be available.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Garus-Pakowska & Mariusz Górajski & Piotr Sakowski, 2022. "Non-Safety and Safety Device Sharp Injuries—Risk of Incidents, SEDs Availability, Attitudes and Perceptions of Nurses According to Cross-Sectional Survey in Poland," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-18, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:18:p:11315-:d:910326
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/18/11315/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/18/11315/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adil Abalkhail & Russell Kabir & Yousif Mohammed Elmosaad & Ameen S. S. Alwashmi & Fahad A. Alhumaydhi & Thamer Alslamah & Khalid A. Almoammar & Yasir Ahmed Alsalamah & Ilias Mahmud, 2022. "Needle-Stick and Sharp Injuries among Hospital Healthcare Workers in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-10, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:18:p:11315-:d:910326. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.