Montella E, Schiavone D, Apicella L, Di Silverio P, Gaudiosi M, Ambrosone E, Moscaritolo E, Triassi M
Department of Public Health, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy.
Ann Ig. 2014 May-Jun;26(3):272-8. doi: 10.7416/ai.2014.1985.
The occupational exposure to biological risk is a frequent event that affects millions of workers in the health sector. Operators are exposed to accidental contact with blood and other potentially infectious biological materials with a frequency higher than that observed in the population (occupational exposure). The pathogens most frequently implicated are the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C (HCV) and hepatitis B (HBV) viruses. The World Health Organization estimates that each year more than 3 million health workers hurt themselves with an object/edge definitely contaminated with at least one HIV (about 170,000 exposures), hepatitis B (approximately 2,000,000 exposures) and hepatitis C (approximately 900,000 exposures). In Italy approximately 100,000 percutaneous exposures/year are estimated to take place. The needlestick injuries in health care workers are, in large part, preventable by adopting measures such as the use of instrumental needlesticks Prevention Devices - NPDs. The adoption of the NPDs is extremely effective in reducing occupational exposure to biological risk (from 63 % to 100 % reduction).
The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the adoption of NPDs for insulin therapy is costeffective in terms of prevention of accidents by Biohazard, compared to administration of insulin with traditional methods (syringe + vial). The estimation is carried out both in the light of current legislation (European Directive 2010/32 and 81/08 Italian Law) and epidemiological data and cost of accidents (according to frequency) and alternative interventions.
The evaluation of cost-effectiveness included the construction of an economic model that would allow the weighting of the costs of accidents that can occur following the administration of insulin therapy with traditional methods. The economic model was developed taking into account the international literature on the phenomenon of "accidental puncture" and allowed the financial quantification of the event. Then we calculated the cost of insulin therapy using the traditional methodology and the cost has been converted to the cost of insulin therapy when administered by NPDs. The period of the study was the year 2010.
The data thus obtained were used to evaluate the benefits of implementing NPDs for insulin therapy, in terms not only of economic advantage but also of preventive efficacy and on the cost of the accident.
职业性生物风险暴露是一种常见事件,影响着医疗卫生部门数百万的工作人员。操作人员意外接触血液和其他潜在传染性生物材料的频率高于普通人群(职业暴露)。最常涉及的病原体是人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV)、丙型肝炎病毒(HCV)和乙型肝炎病毒(HBV)。世界卫生组织估计,每年有超过300万医护人员被至少感染一种HIV(约17万次暴露)、乙型肝炎(约200万次暴露)和丙型肝炎(约90万次暴露)的物体/锐器伤害。在意大利,估计每年发生约10万次经皮暴露。医护人员的针刺伤在很大程度上可通过采取诸如使用器械性针刺预防装置(NPDs)等措施来预防。采用NPDs在降低职业性生物风险暴露方面极为有效(降低幅度从63%至100%)。
本研究的目的是评估与采用传统方法(注射器+药瓶)注射胰岛素相比,采用NPDs进行胰岛素治疗在预防生物危害事故方面是否具有成本效益。根据现行法规(欧洲指令2010/32和意大利法律81/08)以及流行病学数据和事故成本(按频率)及替代干预措施进行估算。
成本效益评估包括构建一个经济模型,该模型能够权衡采用传统方法进行胰岛素治疗后可能发生的事故成本。经济模型的构建考虑了关于“意外穿刺”现象的国际文献,并对该事件进行了财务量化。然后我们计算了采用传统方法进行胰岛素治疗的成本,并将其转换为采用NPDs进行胰岛素治疗时的成本。研究时间段为2010年。
由此获得的数据用于评估实施NPDs进行胰岛素治疗的益处不仅在于经济优势,还在于预防效果以及事故成本。