Benchmarking of percutaneous injuries at a teaching tertiary care center in Saudi Arabia relative to United States hospitals participating in the Exposure Prevention Information Network.

BACKGROUND: Despite recent improvements in policies, practices, and device design, percutaneous injuries (PIs) from needles and sharp instruments continue to expose health care workers to the risk of bloodborne pathogens. METHODS: Prospective surveillance was instituted to study the epidemiologic characteristics of PIs at King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (KAMC-R) from 2004 through 2008 and to benchmark these characteristics relative to those of a network of US hospitals participating in the Exposure Prevention Information Network (EPINet) research group (2004-2007). RESULTS: The mean PIs rate per 100 daily occupied beds in KAMC-R was significantly lower than that reported by teaching and nonteaching US EPINet hospitals. Similar to US EPINet hospitals, nurses at KAMC-R reported more PIs than physicians. Compared with US EPINet hospitals, nurses at KAMC-R experienced more PIs (52.8% vs 38.1%, respectively), whereas physicians experienced fewer PIs (18.4% vs 28.6%, respectively). The majority of PIs happened in patient wards (50.6%) in KAMC-R and operating rooms (34.1%) in US EPINet hospitals. Suturing, which was involved in only 10% of PIs at KAMC-R, was the most frequent PIs mechanism in US EPINet hospitals (23.3%). In both KAMC-R and US EPINet hospitals, disposable syringes were the most frequent devices involved, the left hand was the most common site of injury, and the source patient was largely identifiable. CONCLUSION: We have lower rates of PIs at KAMC-R relative to US EPINet hospitals. Whereas it is difficult to fully explain such differences, this could be due to variations in health care systems, underreporting, or the impact of the PIs prevention activities.

Prevalence of hepatitis B virus markers among blood donors in a tertiary hospital in Tabuk, northwestern Saudi Arabia.

OBJECTIVE: This study was carried out to determine the prevalence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) markers among blood donors in a tertiary hospital in Tabuk, northwestern Saudi Arabia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was done among male Saudi voluntary blood donors at the blood bank of the King Khalid tertiary care hospital in the northwest region of Saudi Arabia. A total of 3192 subjects were included in the study over the period from June 1, 2005 to May 31, 2006. Subjects were tested for evidence of HBV infection plus other relevant blood-borne pathogens. A questionnaire sheet for the collection of personal information (such as name, age, and sex), socioeconomic data (such as marital status, education, and occupation), family history of HBV infection, history of immunization against HBV, and history of past exposure to a high risk procedure or behavior, was prepared and used for each subject. Data were tabulated and statistically analyzed. RESULTS: Among the studied sample, the prevalence of HBsAg (hepatitis B surface antigen) was found to be 3.0% and the prevalence of anti-HBc (anti-hepatitis B core antigen) was found to be 18.7%. Blood donors with positive HBV markers showed significant association with increased age, being married, lower educational level, specific occupations such as blue collar worker and the military, family history of HBV infection, and lack of immunization. However, there was no significant association with history of exposure to high-risk procedure or behavior. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of HBV infection among male Saudi blood donors in the northwest region of Saudi Arabia is high compared to that reported from the central capital area (Riyadh). Public health education programs on HBV infection, adult hepatitis B immunization programs, and raising socioeconomic standards should be initiated in order to target the high-risk groups found in this study. Furthermore, a community-based study is recommended to investigate HBV infection in the northwest region of Saudi Arabia.