Logo image
Back
Investigation of a safety-engineered device to prevent needlestick injury: why has not StatLock stuck?
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

Investigation of a safety-engineered device to prevent needlestick injury: why has not StatLock stuck?

Sharon Griswold, Alisha Bonaroti, Christopher J Rieder, John Erbayri, Jessica Parsons, Romy Nocera and Richard Hamilton
BMJ open, v 3(4), pp e002327-e002327
2013
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002327
PMID: 23616435
Featured in Collection :   UN Sustainable Development Goals @ Drexel
url
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002327View
Published, Version of Record (VoR)CC BY-NC V4.0,  Open

Abstract

Objective This article sought to define whether an alternative safety-engineered device (SED) could help prevent needlestick injury (NSI) in healthcare workers (HCWs) who place central venous catheters (CVCs). Design The study involved three phases: (1) A retrospective analysis of deidentified occupational health records from our tertiary care urban US hospital to clearly identify NSI risk and rates to an HCW during invasive catheter placement; (2) 95 residents were surveyed regarding their knowledge and experience with NSIs and SEDs; (3) A random sample of six residents participated in a focus group session discussing barriers to the use of SED. Setting A single urban US tertiary care teaching hospital. Participants A retrospective analysis of NSI to HCWs in a tertiary care urban US hospital was conducted over a 4-year period (July 2007–June 2011). Ninety-five residents from specialties that often place CVC during training (surgery, surgical subspecialties, internal medicine, anaesthesia and emergency medicine) were surveyed regarding their experience with NSIs and SEDs. A random sample of six residents participated in a focus group session discussing barriers to the use of SED. Results 314 NSIs were identified via occupational health records. 16% (21 of 131) of NSIs occurring in residents and fellows occurred during the securement of an invasive catheter such as a CVC. If an SED device had been used, the 5.25 NSIs/year could have been avoided. Each NSI occurring in an HCW incurred at least $2723 in charges. Thus, utilisation of the SED could have saved a minimum of $57 183 over the 4-year period. Conclusions SEDs are currently available and can be used as an alternative to sharps. If safety and efficacy can be demonstrated, then implementation of such devices can significantly reduce the number of NSIs.

Metrics

17 Record Views
7 citations in Web of Science
10 citations in Scopus

Details

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This publication has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

#3 Good Health and Well-Being

InCites Highlights

Data related to this publication, from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool:

Web of Science research areas
Public, Environmental & Occupational Health
Logo image