RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Exposure to human blood and body fluids is a common risk for nurses. Many factors can affect the prevalence and incidence of this occupational hazard. Psychosocial factors at work may be a risk factor for the exposure. OBJECTIVE: To assess needle stick, sharp injury and mucus exposure to blood-borne pathogens among nurses in Iran and to determine the association between these exposures and psychosocial factors at work. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted on nurses in a public hospital, Tehran, Iran. 364 nurses received and 339 completed and returned a self-reported questionnaire containing demographic data, history of exposure to blood-borne pathogens at work during previous year and the General Nordic questionnaire for psychological and social factors at work (QPS Nordic 34+ Questionnaire). RESULTS: Of 339 participants, 197 (58.1%) reported needle-stick injury, 186 (54.6%) reported another type of sharp injury, and 112 (33%) reported a mucous membrane exposure during the previous year. More than half of the participants who had history of exposure, had not reported it. Those with middle or high level of stress had higher crude and adjusted odds than those with lower stress for all kinds of exposure. Adjusted odds ratios for high stress group (ranging from 2.8 to 4.4) were statistically different from 1. CONCLUSION: There is a high prevalence of needle-stick and sharp injury and mucous membrane exposure to patients' blood or body fluids among studied nurses. There is a significant association between increasing psychosocial factors at work and exposure to blood-borne pathogens among this group of nurses.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

To identify high risk areas for back injury in a large teaching hospital, we calculated standard injury rates and newly developed composite statistics for nursing and non-nursing work groups. Data were extracted from the hospital's workers' compensation database. The hospital-wide total injury rate was 4.6 reports per 100 full-time equivalents (FTE); Compensation Case Rate, 1.4 cases per 100 FTE; Compensation Severity Rate, 76 days lost per 100 FTE; and the Cost Rate, $3742 per 100 FTE. The Total Injury Reports Rate for nursing varied from 14.2 per 100 FTE for Intensive Care Unit (ICU) Nursing to 3.8 per 100 FTE for Pediatric Nursing. Non-nursing areas also demonstrated increased rates for back injury. Individual statistical rates ranked areas differently in risk, whereas composite statistical measures consistently ranked ICU Nursing, Buildings and Grounds, and Orthopedics/Neurological Nursing as the top three. Patient handling was the precipitating event in the majority of nursing back injuries, indicating the need for ergonomic intervention. The use of combined statistical measures provided a more integrative measure for describing and following back injury risk over time.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The employee health service of a Boston hospital wanted a method to prioritize the risk of occupational injury or illness among its employees as the first step in developing a comprehensive ergonomics program. Data from the safety office and workers' compensation third-party administrator (TPA) was combined with hospital payroll data to create rates that compared all work areas based on the common denominator of 100 full-time equivalents (FTE). Rates for four different aspects of injury experience were calculated: incidence of total reported injuries, incidence of serious injuries, level of severity of injuries, and cost. The use of these simple rates alone was inadequate to accurately prioritize risk. Because most work areas ranked differently from one rate scale to the next, it was unclear which, if any, single rate most accurately defined risk. Composite statistics that combined all of the rates were needed. The Composite Risk Indicator (CRI), the Average Relative Risk (ARR), and the Justified Average Relative Risk (JARR) were developed and examined for their utility. The JARR emerged as the best choice in this setting because it captured all available information about injury or illness experience and provided a meaningful single indicator of risk that could be followed over time.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The recent deaths of two workers with coronary artery disease (CAD) following exposure to carbon monoxide (CO) at work reinforced our appreciation of the hazard of this exposure to individuals with preexisting heart disease. Carbon monoxide acts to precipitate ischemia by reducing oxygen delivery to the myocardium. Animal and in vitro experiments suggest that CO may accelerate the development of atherosclerosis, particularly if exposure is in association with other risk factors. Thus, persons with known CAD who are exposed to CO at work are at risk for both the acceleration of the course of the underlying disease and for precipitation of acute ischemia or infarction following excessive exposure. Particular attention should be given to control of CO exposures in light of this hazard. For various reasons, preplacement evaluations or other job selection procedures do not adequately address his hazard. In view of the high prevalence of CAD in the U.S. and the high frequency of workplace exposure to CO, particular attention should be given to control of CO exposure through industrial hygiene measures.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PIP: The report, "Recent Trends in Louisiana Fertility," released in January 1973 is reviewed. This report was distinguished from other Louisiana Family Planning Program evaluations of demographic impact by several features: 1) Louisiana crude birth rates are compared with those of the United States and Mississippi; 2) differences in age-specific nonwhite fertility rates in Louisiana between 1965 and 1971 are compared with corresponding differences in Mississippi; and 3) the concepts of "parity components of age-specific rates" and "excess births" are introduced into the discussion of Louisiana fertility trends. According to the reviewers, no scientific or even psudoscientific analysis of the Louisiana Family Planning Program has ever been published or made available by the Family Health Foundation to any state agency. They contend that the so-called evaluations of the demographic impact of the Louisiana Family Planning Program are textbook examples of customized statistics. It is suggested that the family planning program services may contribute to increased natality and that the family planning program workers are more highly motivated to retain their jobs than to bring down the brith rate. The reviewers are not convinced that the statisticians on the Family Health Foundation are responsible for all of the narrative that accompanies their charts and tables.^ieng

Asunto(s)