Differences between hospital- and community-acquired blood exposure incidents revealed by a regional expert counseling center.
SourceInfection, 34, 1, (2006), pp. 17-21
Article / Letter to editor
Display more detailsDisplay less details
Solid State NMR
Primary and Community Care
Physical Chemistry/Solid State NMR
SubjectN4i 1: Pathogenesis and modulation of inflammation; N4i 2: Invasive mycoses and compromised host; NCMLS 1: Immunity, infection and tissue repair; UMCN 4.1: Microbial pathogenesis and host defense
OBJECTIVE: One year (2003) regional analysis of all blood exposure incidents from hospitals as well as from the community. DESIGN: Establishment of an easily accessible regional expert counseling center, operating 24 h a day, for all accidental blood exposures. Tasks of the center were to register incoming calls, to inform and counsel the victim, to assess the risk of the incident, and to provide a plan of further actions, including prophylactic measures. SETTING: A Dutch region (Northeast Brabant) with 500,000 inhabitants and two major hospitals (1,786 beds). RESULTS: A total of 454 incidents (1.2 per day) were recorded. Only half of the incidents occurred in the hospital setting (n = 234), whereas the others (n = 220) took place in the community setting. Nearly all (95%, n = 432) incidents occurred during work, and most of them (84%, n = 385) were related to health care activities. In the hospital setting injuries occurred with physicians (13%), nursing staff (45%), operating room (OR) staff (13%), ancillary (18%), others (10%). In the community setting, incidents took place among healthcare workers (48%), detention and police officers (10%), civilians (10%), general practitioners/dentists and their staff (8%), cleaning staff (4%) and work-related incidents not falling into any of the above categories (7%). More low risk incidents took place outside the hospital (87% vs. 68% in hospital), while high-risk incidents predominantly occurred within the hospital setting (23% vs. 6%). The hepatitis-B immunization rate was significantly lower in victims from the community than in those working in hospitals (38% vs. 96%). Reports from incidents in the community setting were delayed. CONCLUSIONS: Incidents that expose individuals to blood-borne pathogens occur equally frequent in the hospital and non-hospital (community) setting. Therefore, a regional expert counseling center, accessible around-the-clock, for all types of blood-exposure incidents is needed. Blood-exposure prevention programs should aim at a reduction of high-risk incidents within hospitals, and at increasing the awareness for vaccination and early reporting within the community setting.
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
- Academic publications 
- Faculty of Medical Sciences 
- Faculty of Science 
Upload full text
Use your RU credentials (u/z-number and password) to log in with SURFconext to upload a file for processing by the repository team.