A comparative user evaluation of three needle-protective devices

Abstract

Needlestick injuries (NSI) can result in healthcare workers being exposed to blood-borne viruses. Between 1997 and 2002, three healthcare workers in the UK have seroconverted to hepatitis C and one to human immunodeficiency virus (Public Health Laboratory Service (PHLS), 2003). Experience both in the UK and the USA suggests that even robust educational strategies may be insufficient to reduce the number of occupationally acquired NSI (Jagger et al, 1988). Needle-protective devices have now become more widely available and several studies have demonstrated an associated reduced risk of NSK. It is, however, essential that the devices are appropriately evaluated before introduction to ensure that they meet user requirements, do not interfere with function and reduce NSI risk. This article describes an evaluation programme carried out at the University Hospital Birmingham, UK. The programme focused on three key areas: safety, usability and compatibility. Results demonstrated that nurses rapidly adapt their practices to use the new safety devices and the study highlighted key education requirements that would be required before implementation. In addition, without this evaluation, it would not have been identified that attachment of the safety needles to the syringes requires a push-and-twist method or the use of LuerLok syringes to prevent detachment on activation of the safety procedure