Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 19(7): 504-6, 1998 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-9702573

ABSTRACT

New recommendations regarding prophylaxis of healthcare workers exposed to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prompted us to examine the frequency and nature of percutaneous injuries at this hospital. Four previously defined risk factors for transmission of HIV were evaluated. Between 1993 and 1995, 1,070 percutaneous injuries were reported, including 11 in which the source patient had acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). Five of these injuries involved at least one risk factor for transmission. No source patient was found to have AIDS as a result of testing following exposure. We conclude that high-risk injuries are infrequent and that postexposure prophylaxis will not increase costs greatly at this medical center.


Subject(s)
Cross Infection/prevention & control , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Needlestick Injuries/epidemiology , Hospitals, University , Humans , Risk Factors , United States , Virginia
2.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 17(10): 641-8, 1996 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-8899437

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To study compliance with preventive strategies at a university hospital during an outbreak of nosocomial influenza A during the winter of 1988, and the rates of vaccination of healthcare workers and of nosocomial influenza following changes in vaccine practices after the outbreak. DESIGN: Retrospective review of employee health, hospital epidemiology, hospital computing; and clinical microbiology records. SETTING: A university hospital. INTERVENTIONS: Unvaccinated personnel with exposure within the previous 72 hours to an unisolated case of influenza were offered influenza vaccine and 14 days of amantadine hydrochloride prophylaxis. Personnel with exposure more than 72 hours before evaluation were offered vaccine. A mobile cart was introduced for vaccinating personnel after the 1988 outbreak. RESULTS: An outbreak of influenza with 10 nosocomial cases occurred in 1988. Only 4% of exposed employees had been vaccinated previously and 23% of exposed, unvaccinated employees agreed to take vaccine, amantadine, or both. A mobile-cart vaccination program was instituted, and annual vaccination rates steadily increased from 26.3% in 1989 to 1990 to 38% in 1993 to 1994 (P < .0001). The relative frequency of documented cases of influenza in employees with symptoms of influenza decreased significantly during this period (P = .025), but nosocomial influenza rates among patients did not change significantly. CONCLUSION: A mobile-cart influenza vaccination program was associated with a significant increase in compliance among healthcare workers, but a majority still remained unvaccinated. The rate of nosocomial influenza among patients was not reduced by the modest increase in the vaccination rate, but influenza rates remained acceptably low, perhaps due to respiratory isolation of patients and furlough of employees with influenza.


Subject(s)
Cross Infection/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Immunization Programs , Influenza A virus , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Vaccination/trends , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Amantadine/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Chemoprevention , Chi-Square Distribution , Child , Child, Preschool , Hospital Bed Capacity, 500 and over , Hospitals, University , Humans , Immunization Programs/methods , Immunization Programs/trends , Infant , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Influenza, Human/transmission , Longitudinal Studies , Middle Aged , Patient Isolation , Population Surveillance , Program Evaluation , Treatment Refusal , Virginia/epidemiology
3.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 16(10): 570-6, 1995 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-8568201

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the cause of an outbreak of needlestick injuries (NSIs) in hospital employees. SETTING: A 700-bed university hospital. DESIGN: Outbreak investigation, laboratory evaluation of a medical waste disposal device, cost analysis. METHODS: Employee health department records were reviewed of workers suffering sticks from needles piercing fiberboard-contaminated material containers (CMCs). A laboratory evaluation of needle-puncture resistance properties of the CMCs was performed using a testing apparatus. The cost of a hospital waste disposal program using fiberboard CMCs was compared with the cost of a program using rigid plastic (polypropylene) boxes. RESULTS: During 40 months of surveillance in 1986 and from 1989 to 1991, only one NSI had occurred from a needle piercing a CMC. During 9 months in 1993, 13 NSIs occurred due to needles piercing CMCs (P < .001). No clinical illness resulted from the NSIs. The outbreak was halted by a temporary change to plastic (polypropylene) boxes for sharps disposal ($4.92 to $23.33/cu ft) until receipt of a box with a newly designed solid fiberboard liner ($1.25/cu ft). CMC liners used during the epidemic had a mean needle puncture resistance of 527 g, as compared with 660 g for liners used before the outbreak (P < .001). The new solid fiberboard liner has a mean puncture resistance of 1,765 g. A program of waste disposal using fiberboard CMCs was found to cost approximately one-seventh the cost of a program using plastic boxes for disposal of infectious waste. CONCLUSION: A program for infectious waste disposal using fiberboard CMCs can be safe and cost-effective if appropriate standards for puncture resistance are met.


Subject(s)
Containment of Biohazards , Disease Outbreaks , Medical Waste Disposal , Needlestick Injuries/epidemiology , Personnel, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Containment of Biohazards/economics , Containment of Biohazards/instrumentation , Costs and Cost Analysis , Evaluation Studies as Topic , Hospital Costs , Hospitals, University , Humans , Medical Waste Disposal/economics , Medical Waste Disposal/instrumentation , Needlestick Injuries/etiology , Needlestick Injuries/prevention & control , Plastics , Program Evaluation/economics , Virginia/epidemiology
4.
N Engl J Med ; 331(3): 169-73, 1994 Jul 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-8008031

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: After outbreaks of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention proposed the use of respirators with high-efficiency particulate air filters (HEPA respirators) as part of isolation precautions against tuberculosis, along with a respiratory-protection program for health care workers that includes medical evaluation, training, and tests of the fit of the respirators. Each HEPA respirator costs between $7.51 and $9.08, about 10 times the cost of respirators currently used. METHODS: We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis using data from the University of Virginia Hospital on exposure to patients with tuberculosis and rates at which the purified-protein-derivative (PPD) skin test became positive in hospital workers. The costs of a respiratory-protection program were based on those of an existing program for workers dealing with hazardous substances. RESULTS: During 1992, 11 patients with documented tuberculosis were admitted to our hospital. Eight of 3852 workers (0.2 percent) had PPD tests that became positive. Five of these conversions were believed to be due to the booster phenomenon; one followed unprotected exposure to a patient not yet in isolation; the other two occurred in workers who had never entered a tuberculosis isolation room. These data suggest that it will take more than one year for the use of HEPA respirators to prevent a single conversion of the PPD test. Assuming that one conversion is prevented per year, however, it would take 41 years at out hospital to prevent one case of occupationally acquired tuberculosis, at a cost of $1.3 million to $18.5 million. CONCLUSIONS: Given the effectiveness of currently recommended measures to prevent nosocomial transmission of tuberculosis, the addition of HEPA respirators would offer negligible protective efficacy at great cost.


Subject(s)
Cross Infection/prevention & control , Occupational Diseases/prevention & control , Tuberculosis/prevention & control , Ventilators, Mechanical/economics , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Cross Infection/economics , Humans , Occupational Diseases/economics , Tuberculosis/economics
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...