CORE
CO
nnecting
RE
positories
Services
Services overview
Explore all CORE services
Access to raw data
API
Dataset
FastSync
Content discovery
Recommender
Discovery
OAI identifiers
OAI Resolver
Managing content
Dashboard
Bespoke contracts
Consultancy services
Support us
Support us
Membership
Sponsorship
Research partnership
About
About
About us
Our mission
Team
Blog
FAQs
Contact us
Community governance
Governance
Advisory Board
Board of supporters
Research network
Innovations
Our research
Labs
Use of safety-engineered devices by healthcare workers for intravenous and/or phlebotomy procedures in healthcare settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors
Elie A. Akl
Rami A. Ballout
+4 more
Batoul Diab
Alain C. Harb
Selma Khamassi
Rami Tarabay
Publication date
1 January 2016
Publisher
BioMed Central Ltd.
Doi
Cite
View
on
PubMed
Abstract
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. © 2016 The Author(s)
Similar works
Full text
Open in the Core reader
Download PDF
Available Versions
AUB ScholarWorks (American Univ. of Beirut)
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:scholarworks.aub.edu.lb:10...
Last time updated on 16/04/2025
Springer - Publisher Connector
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
Last time updated on 03/05/2017
Crossref
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
info:doi/10.1186%2Fs12913-016-...
Last time updated on 05/06/2019