Cargando…
Use of safety-engineered devices by healthcare workers for intravenous and/or phlebotomy procedures in healthcare settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: The acquisition of needle-stick injuries (NSI) in a healthcare setting poses an occupational hazard of transmitting blood-borne pathogens from patients to healthcare workers (HCWs). The objective of this study was to systematically review the evidence about the efficacy and safety of usi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5007867/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27581947 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1705-y |
_version_ | 1782451283555254272 |
---|---|
author | Ballout, Rami A. Diab, Batoul Harb, Alain C. Tarabay, Rami Khamassi, Selma Akl, Elie A. |
author_facet | Ballout, Rami A. Diab, Batoul Harb, Alain C. Tarabay, Rami Khamassi, Selma Akl, Elie A. |
author_sort | Ballout, Rami A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The acquisition of needle-stick injuries (NSI) in a healthcare setting poses an occupational hazard of transmitting blood-borne pathogens from patients to healthcare workers (HCWs). The objective of this study was to systematically review the evidence about the efficacy and safety of using safety-engineered intravenous devices and safety-engineered phlebotomy devices by HCWs. METHODS: We included randomized and non-randomized studies comparing safety-engineered devices to conventional/standard devices that lack safety features for delivering intravenous injections and/or for blood-withdrawal procedures (phlebotomy). The outcomes of interest included NSI rates, and blood-borne infections rates among HCWs and patients. We conducted an extensive literature search strategy using the OVID interface in October 2013. We followed the standard methods for study selection and data abstraction. When possible, we conducted meta-analyses using a random-effects model. We used the GRADE methodology to assess the quality of evidence by outcome. RESULTS: We identified twenty-two eligible studies: Twelve assessed safety-engineered devices for intravenous procedures, five for phlebotomy procedures, and five for both. Twenty-one of those studies were observational while one was a randomized trial. All studies assessed the reduction in NSIs among HCWs. For safety-engineered intravenous devices, the pooled relative risk for NSI per HCW was 0.28 [0.13, 0.59] (moderate quality evidence). The pooled relative risk for NSI per device used or procedure performed was 0.34 [0.08,1.49] (low quality evidence). For safety-engineered phlebotomy devices, the pooled relative risk for NSI per HCW was 0.57 [0.38, 0.84] (moderate quality evidence). The pooled relative risk for NSI per device used or procedure performed was 0.53 [0.43,0.65] (moderate quality evidence). We identified no studies assessing the outcome of blood-borne infections among healthcare workers or patients. CONCLUSION: There is moderate-quality evidence that the use of safety-engineered devices in intravenous injections and infusions, and phlebotomy (blood-drawing) procedures reduces NSI rates of HCWs. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1705-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5007867 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-50078672016-09-02 Use of safety-engineered devices by healthcare workers for intravenous and/or phlebotomy procedures in healthcare settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis Ballout, Rami A. Diab, Batoul Harb, Alain C. Tarabay, Rami Khamassi, Selma Akl, Elie A. BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: The acquisition of needle-stick injuries (NSI) in a healthcare setting poses an occupational hazard of transmitting blood-borne pathogens from patients to healthcare workers (HCWs). The objective of this study was to systematically review the evidence about the efficacy and safety of using safety-engineered intravenous devices and safety-engineered phlebotomy devices by HCWs. METHODS: We included randomized and non-randomized studies comparing safety-engineered devices to conventional/standard devices that lack safety features for delivering intravenous injections and/or for blood-withdrawal procedures (phlebotomy). The outcomes of interest included NSI rates, and blood-borne infections rates among HCWs and patients. We conducted an extensive literature search strategy using the OVID interface in October 2013. We followed the standard methods for study selection and data abstraction. When possible, we conducted meta-analyses using a random-effects model. We used the GRADE methodology to assess the quality of evidence by outcome. RESULTS: We identified twenty-two eligible studies: Twelve assessed safety-engineered devices for intravenous procedures, five for phlebotomy procedures, and five for both. Twenty-one of those studies were observational while one was a randomized trial. All studies assessed the reduction in NSIs among HCWs. For safety-engineered intravenous devices, the pooled relative risk for NSI per HCW was 0.28 [0.13, 0.59] (moderate quality evidence). The pooled relative risk for NSI per device used or procedure performed was 0.34 [0.08,1.49] (low quality evidence). For safety-engineered phlebotomy devices, the pooled relative risk for NSI per HCW was 0.57 [0.38, 0.84] (moderate quality evidence). The pooled relative risk for NSI per device used or procedure performed was 0.53 [0.43,0.65] (moderate quality evidence). We identified no studies assessing the outcome of blood-borne infections among healthcare workers or patients. CONCLUSION: There is moderate-quality evidence that the use of safety-engineered devices in intravenous injections and infusions, and phlebotomy (blood-drawing) procedures reduces NSI rates of HCWs. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1705-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-09-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5007867/ /pubmed/27581947 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1705-y Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Ballout, Rami A. Diab, Batoul Harb, Alain C. Tarabay, Rami Khamassi, Selma Akl, Elie A. Use of safety-engineered devices by healthcare workers for intravenous and/or phlebotomy procedures in healthcare settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Use of safety-engineered devices by healthcare workers for intravenous and/or phlebotomy procedures in healthcare settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Use of safety-engineered devices by healthcare workers for intravenous and/or phlebotomy procedures in healthcare settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Use of safety-engineered devices by healthcare workers for intravenous and/or phlebotomy procedures in healthcare settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Use of safety-engineered devices by healthcare workers for intravenous and/or phlebotomy procedures in healthcare settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Use of safety-engineered devices by healthcare workers for intravenous and/or phlebotomy procedures in healthcare settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | use of safety-engineered devices by healthcare workers for intravenous and/or phlebotomy procedures in healthcare settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5007867/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27581947 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1705-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT balloutramia useofsafetyengineereddevicesbyhealthcareworkersforintravenousandorphlebotomyproceduresinhealthcaresettingsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT diabbatoul useofsafetyengineereddevicesbyhealthcareworkersforintravenousandorphlebotomyproceduresinhealthcaresettingsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT harbalainc useofsafetyengineereddevicesbyhealthcareworkersforintravenousandorphlebotomyproceduresinhealthcaresettingsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT tarabayrami useofsafetyengineereddevicesbyhealthcareworkersforintravenousandorphlebotomyproceduresinhealthcaresettingsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT khamassiselma useofsafetyengineereddevicesbyhealthcareworkersforintravenousandorphlebotomyproceduresinhealthcaresettingsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT akleliea useofsafetyengineereddevicesbyhealthcareworkersforintravenousandorphlebotomyproceduresinhealthcaresettingsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |