Cargando…

Cross-sectional study assessing the risk of needlestick injury from an insulin pen among nursing care providers

OBJECTIVE: Needlestick injuries caused by insulin pen injection are a serious occupational hazard for health care workers in China. We evaluated the prevalence of stick injuries with insulin pen injection and identified associated risk factors. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey was conducted from...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Yanlin, Liu, Li, Cai, Kaixiu, Zhang, Lirong, Liu, Ling, Zhou, Xianli, Liu, Zhiping, Peng, Yu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7645520/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33108918
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0300060520965400
_version_ 1783606657350107136
author Zhang, Yanlin
Liu, Li
Cai, Kaixiu
Zhang, Lirong
Liu, Ling
Zhou, Xianli
Liu, Zhiping
Peng, Yu
author_facet Zhang, Yanlin
Liu, Li
Cai, Kaixiu
Zhang, Lirong
Liu, Ling
Zhou, Xianli
Liu, Zhiping
Peng, Yu
author_sort Zhang, Yanlin
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Needlestick injuries caused by insulin pen injection are a serious occupational hazard for health care workers in China. We evaluated the prevalence of stick injuries with insulin pen injection and identified associated risk factors. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey was conducted from 1 October to 30 November 2018 in two tier three hospitals in Chongqing, China. Self-administered questionnaires were developed by the Chinese Nursing Association Diabetes Care Special Committee. We analyzed associations between potential risk factors and injuries at different operational steps. RESULTS: A total 233 of 302 (77%) participants (mean age 28.5±5.3 years) reported a needlestick incident. Most respondents (49%) had 3 to 10 years’ working experience and had received injection safety training. Most needlestick injuries occurred while recapping needles after injection. The risk of injury was significantly associated with department and job position. The injury rate increased with increased number of years worked. Respondents with ≥10 years working experience reported the highest needle-capping injury rate (88%): odds ratio 1.93, 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 3.69. CONCLUSION: Recapping needles after injection showed the highest risk for stick injury with an insulin pen. Nurses in the surgery department and those with longer work histories were more likely to be injured.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7645520
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76455202020-11-17 Cross-sectional study assessing the risk of needlestick injury from an insulin pen among nursing care providers Zhang, Yanlin Liu, Li Cai, Kaixiu Zhang, Lirong Liu, Ling Zhou, Xianli Liu, Zhiping Peng, Yu J Int Med Res Retrospective Clinical Research Report OBJECTIVE: Needlestick injuries caused by insulin pen injection are a serious occupational hazard for health care workers in China. We evaluated the prevalence of stick injuries with insulin pen injection and identified associated risk factors. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey was conducted from 1 October to 30 November 2018 in two tier three hospitals in Chongqing, China. Self-administered questionnaires were developed by the Chinese Nursing Association Diabetes Care Special Committee. We analyzed associations between potential risk factors and injuries at different operational steps. RESULTS: A total 233 of 302 (77%) participants (mean age 28.5±5.3 years) reported a needlestick incident. Most respondents (49%) had 3 to 10 years’ working experience and had received injection safety training. Most needlestick injuries occurred while recapping needles after injection. The risk of injury was significantly associated with department and job position. The injury rate increased with increased number of years worked. Respondents with ≥10 years working experience reported the highest needle-capping injury rate (88%): odds ratio 1.93, 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 3.69. CONCLUSION: Recapping needles after injection showed the highest risk for stick injury with an insulin pen. Nurses in the surgery department and those with longer work histories were more likely to be injured. SAGE Publications 2020-10-27 /pmc/articles/PMC7645520/ /pubmed/33108918 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0300060520965400 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Retrospective Clinical Research Report
Zhang, Yanlin
Liu, Li
Cai, Kaixiu
Zhang, Lirong
Liu, Ling
Zhou, Xianli
Liu, Zhiping
Peng, Yu
Cross-sectional study assessing the risk of needlestick injury from an insulin pen among nursing care providers
title Cross-sectional study assessing the risk of needlestick injury from an insulin pen among nursing care providers
title_full Cross-sectional study assessing the risk of needlestick injury from an insulin pen among nursing care providers
title_fullStr Cross-sectional study assessing the risk of needlestick injury from an insulin pen among nursing care providers
title_full_unstemmed Cross-sectional study assessing the risk of needlestick injury from an insulin pen among nursing care providers
title_short Cross-sectional study assessing the risk of needlestick injury from an insulin pen among nursing care providers
title_sort cross-sectional study assessing the risk of needlestick injury from an insulin pen among nursing care providers
topic Retrospective Clinical Research Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7645520/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33108918
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0300060520965400
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangyanlin crosssectionalstudyassessingtheriskofneedlestickinjuryfromaninsulinpenamongnursingcareproviders
AT liuli crosssectionalstudyassessingtheriskofneedlestickinjuryfromaninsulinpenamongnursingcareproviders
AT caikaixiu crosssectionalstudyassessingtheriskofneedlestickinjuryfromaninsulinpenamongnursingcareproviders
AT zhanglirong crosssectionalstudyassessingtheriskofneedlestickinjuryfromaninsulinpenamongnursingcareproviders
AT liuling crosssectionalstudyassessingtheriskofneedlestickinjuryfromaninsulinpenamongnursingcareproviders
AT zhouxianli crosssectionalstudyassessingtheriskofneedlestickinjuryfromaninsulinpenamongnursingcareproviders
AT liuzhiping crosssectionalstudyassessingtheriskofneedlestickinjuryfromaninsulinpenamongnursingcareproviders
AT pengyu crosssectionalstudyassessingtheriskofneedlestickinjuryfromaninsulinpenamongnursingcareproviders