Injection practices among clinicians in United States health care settings.

BACKGROUND: Improper use of syringes, needles, and medication vials has resulted in patient-to-patient transmission of bloodborne pathogens, including hepatitis C virus. This study examined the injection practices of health care providers to identify trends and target opportunities for education on safe practices. METHODS: An on-line survey was conducted in May and June 2010 of clinicians in US health care settings that prepare and/or administer parenteral medications. RESULTS: The majority of the 5446 eligible respondents reported injection practices consistent with current recommendations. However, the following unsafe practices were identified: 6.0% "sometimes or always" use single-dose/single-use vials for more than 1 patient; 0.9% "sometimes or always" reuse a syringe but change the needle for use on a second patient; 15.1% reuse a syringe to enter a multidose vial and then 6.5% save that vial for use on another patient (1.1% overall). CONCLUSION: Unsafe injection practices represent an ongoing threat to patient safety. Ensuring safe injection practices in all health care settings will require a multifaceted approach that focuses on surveillance, oversight, enforcement, and continuing education.

Design of the environment of care for safety of patients and personnel: does form follow function or vice versa in the intensive care unit?

We review the context of the environment of care in the intensive care unit setting in relation to patient safety and quality, specifically addressing healthcare-associated infection issues and solutions involving interdisciplinary teams. Issues addressed include current and future architectural design and layout trends, construction trends affecting intensive care units, and prevention of construction-associated healthcare-associated infections related to airborne and waterborne risks and design solutions. Specific elements include single-occupancy, acuity-scalable intensive care unit rooms; environmental aspects of hand hygiene, such as water risks, sink design/location, human waste management, surface selection (floor covering, countertops, furniture, and equipment) and cleaning, antimicrobial-treated or similar materials, ultraviolet germicidal irradiation, specialized rooms (airborne infection isolation and protective environments), and water system design and strategies for safe use of potable water and mitigation of water intrusion. Effective design and operational use of the intensive care unit environment of care must engage critical care personnel from initial planning and design through occupancy of the new/renovated intensive care unit as part of the infection control risk assessment team. The interdisciplinary infection control risk assessment team can address key environment of care design features to enhance the safety of intensive care unit patients, personnel, and visitors. This perspective will ensure the environment of care supports human factors and behavioral aspects of the interaction between the environment of care and its occupants.

Current views of health care design and construction: practical implications for safer, cleaner environments.

Infection preventionists (IP) play an increasingly important role in preventing health care-associated infection in the physical environment associated with new construction or renovation of health care facilities. The Guidelines for Design and Construction of Hospital and Healthcare Facilities, 2010, formerly known as "AIA Guidelines" was the origin of the "infection control risk assessment" now required by multiple agencies. These Guidelines represent minimum US health care standards and provide guidance on best practices. They recognize that the built environment has a profound affect on health and the natural environment and require that health care facilities be designed to "first, do no harm." This review uses the Guidelines as a blueprint for IPs' role in design and construction, updating familiar concepts to the 2010 edition with special emphasis on IP input into design given its longer range impact on health care-associated infection prevention while linking to safety and sustainability. Section I provides an overview of disease transmission risks from the built environment and related costs, section II presents a broad view of design and master planning, and section III addresses the detailed design strategies for infection prevention specifically addressed in the 2010 Facility Guidelines Institute edition.

Applications of ultraviolet germicidal irradiation disinfection in health care facilities: effective adjunct, but not stand-alone technology.

This review evaluates the applicability and relative contribution of ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI) to disinfection of air in health care facilities. A section addressing the use of UVGI for environmental surfaces is also included. The germicidal susceptibility of biologic agents is addressed, but with emphasis on application in health care facilities. The balance of scientific evidence indicates that UVGI should be considered as a disinfection application in a health care setting only in conjunction with other well-established elements, such as appropriate heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems; dynamic removal of contaminants from the air; and preventive maintenance in combination with through cleaning of the care environment. We conclude that although UVGI is microbiocidal, it is not "ready for prime time" as a primary intervention to kill or inactivate infectious microorganisms; rather, it should be considered an adjunct. Other factors, such as careful design of the built environment, installation and effective operation of the HVAC system, and a high level of attention to traditional cleaning and disinfection, must be assessed before a health care facility can decide to rely solely on UVGI to meet indoor air quality requirements for health care facilities. More targeted and multiparameter studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and incremental benefit of UVGI for mitigating reservoirs of microorganisms and ultimately preventing cross-transmission of pathogens that lead to health care-associated infections.

Evaluating hygienic cleaning in health care settings: what you do not know can harm your patients.

Recent studies using direct covert observation or a fluorescent targeting method have consistently confirmed that most near patient surfaces are not being cleaned in accordance with existing hospital policies while other studies have confirmed that patients admitted to rooms previously occupied by patients with hospital pathogens have a substantially greater risk of acquiring the same pathogen than patients not occupying such rooms. These findings, in the context recent studies that have shown disinfection cleaning can be improved on average more than 100% over baseline, and that such improvement has been associated with a decrease in environmental contamination of high touch surfaces, support the benefit of decreasing environmental contamination of such surfaces. This review clarifies the differences between measuring cleanliness versus cleaning practices; describes and analyzes conventional and enhanced monitoring programs; addresses the critical aspects of evaluating disinfection hygiene in light of guidelines and standards; analyzes current hygienic practice monitoring tools; and recommends elements that should be included in an enhanced monitoring program.

APIC position paper: Improving health care worker influenza immunization rates.

The Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC) is a non-profit, international organization governed and directed by a board of directors, consisting of four officers and 10 directors. APIC has more than 110 regional Chapters in the United States and more than 10,000 members worldwide. As an authority in infection control, APIC endorses the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices' (ACIP) recommendations published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports

Home study program. Can we build a safer OR?

PEOPLE WHO WORK in health care are among the brightest and most dedicated workers in the United States, but they are human, and humans make mistakes. HEALTH CARE FACILITIES are moving away from a culture of perfection and exploring how human factors predispose people to make certain types of errors. THIS ARTICLE discusses the types of errors being made and the organizations that are working to redesign the health care system to make it easier to do the job more safely and more difficult to make a mistake.

Organizational and environmental factors that affect worker health and safety and patient outcomes.

This article reviews organizational factors that influence the satisfaction, health, safety, and well-being of health care workers and ultimately, the satisfaction, safety, and quality of care for patients. The impact of the work environment on working conditions and the effects on health care workers and patients are also addressed. Studies focusing on worker health and safety concerns affected by the organization and the physical work environment provide evidence of direct positive and/or adverse effects on performance and suggest indirect effects on the quality of patient care. The strongest links between worker and patient outcomes are demonstrated in literature on nosocomial transmission of infections. Transmission of infections from worker to patient and from patient to patient via health care worker has been well documented in clinical studies. Literature on outbreaks of infectious diseases in health care settings has linked the physical environment with adverse patient and worker outcomes. An increasing number of studies are looking at the relationship between improvement in organizational factors and measurable and positive change in patient outcomes. Characteristics of selected magnet hospitals are reviewed as one model for improving patient and worker outcomes.