Shah Syed M, Bonauto David, Silverstein Barbara, Foley Michael
Safety & Health Assessment & Research for Prevention (SHARP) Program, Washington State Department of Labor and Industries, Olympia, Washington, USA.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2005 Sep;26(9):775-81. doi: 10.1086/502616.
To characterize accepted workers' compensation claims for needlestick injuries filed by healthcare workers (HCWs) in non-hospital compared with hospital settings in Washington State.
Descriptive study of all accepted workers' compensation claims filed between 1996 and 2000 for needlestick injuries.
All Washington State HCWs eligible to file a state fund workers' compensation claim and those who filed a workers' compensation claim for a needlestick injury.
There were 3,303 accepted state fund HCW needlestick injury claims. The incidence of needlestick injury claims per 10,000 full-time-equivalent HCWs in hospitals was 158.6; in dental offices, 104.7; in physicians' offices, 87.0; and in skilled nursing facilities, 80.8. The most common mechanisms of needlestick injury by work location were as follows: for hospitals, suturing and other surgical procedures (16.7%), administering an injection (12.7%), and drawing blood (10%); for dentists' offices, recapping (21.3%) and cleaning trays and instruments (18.2%); for physicians' offices, disposal (22.2%) and administering an injection (10.2%); and for skilled nursing facilities, disposal (23.7%) and administering an injection (14.9%). Nurses accounted for the largest (29%) proportion of HCWs involved, followed by dental assistants (17%) and laboratory technicians and phlebotomists (12%) in non-hospital settings. Rates of needlestick injury claims increased for non-hospital settings by 7.5% annually (95% confidence interval [CI95], 4.89% to 10.22%; P < .0001). Rates decreased for hospital settings by 5.8% annually, but the decline was not statistically significant (CI95, -12.50% to 1.34%; P < .1088). HCWs were exposed to hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and human immunodeficiency viruses in non-hospital settings.
There was a difference in the incidence rate and mechanisms of needlestick injuries on review of workers' compensation claim records for HCWs in non-hospital and hospital settings.
对比华盛顿州非医院环境与医院环境中医护人员（HCW）因针刺伤所提交的已受理工伤赔偿申请的特征。
对1996年至2000年间提交的所有已受理针刺伤工伤赔偿申请进行描述性研究。
所有符合华盛顿州基金工伤赔偿申请资格的医护人员，以及那些因针刺伤提交工伤赔偿申请的人员。
共有3303份已受理的州基金医护人员针刺伤赔偿申请。每10000名全职等效医护人员中，医院针刺伤索赔发生率为158.6；牙科诊所为104.7；医生办公室为87.0；熟练护理机构为80.8。按工作地点划分，针刺伤最常见的机制如下：医院中，缝合及其他外科手术（16.7%）、注射给药（12.7%）和采血（10%）；牙科诊所中，回套针帽（21.3%）和清洁托盘及器械（18.2%）；医生办公室中，处置（22.2%）和注射给药（10.2%）；熟练护理机构中，处置（23.7%）和注射给药（14.9%）。在非医院环境中，护士占涉及针刺伤的医护人员比例最大（29%），其次是牙科助理（17%）以及实验室技术员和采血员（12%）。非医院环境中针刺伤索赔率每年增加7.5%（95%置信区间[CI95]，4.89%至10.22%；P <.0001）。医院环境中索赔率每年下降5.8%，但下降无统计学意义（CI95，-12.50%至1.34%；P <.1088）。非医院环境中医护人员接触到了乙型肝炎病毒、丙型肝炎病毒和人类免疫缺陷病毒。
审查非医院和医院环境中医护人员的工伤赔偿申请记录发现，针刺伤的发生率和机制存在差异。
