...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The International journal of risk & safety in medicine. >'Scalpel safety': Modeling the effectiveness of different safety devices' ability to reduce scalpel blade injuries
【24h】

'Scalpel safety': Modeling the effectiveness of different safety devices' ability to reduce scalpel blade injuries

机译：“手术刀安全性”：模拟不同安全装置减少手术刀刮伤的能力的有效性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background: The objective of this study was to analyse and compare the potential effectiveness of two safety strategies in reducing scalpel blade injuries. The two strategies examined were safety scalpel vs. a single-handed scalpel blade remover combined with a hands free passing technique (HFPT) (e.g. passing tray or neutral zone). Methods: This was a retrospective study involving review of a 550-bed adult metropolitan tertiary referral hospital's sharps injuries database, chart review, and hypothetical modelling of the data to determine potential preventable injuries. The modelling was done twice, firstly assuming 100% effectiveness of each safety device and secondly using previously published activation rates for "active" safety devices which were considered to be a more accurate reflection of real-life work practices. Results: A total of 141 scalpel injuries were reported between 1987 and 2003. Clinical charts were reviewed for 137 of these injuries. Just under 50% of injuries were sustained while the scalpel was in use and these were assumed to be not preventable. Assuming 100% effectiveness for each safety device resulted in 72 injuries being prevented by safety scalpels and 69 injuries being prevented by a combination of a single-handed scalpel blade remover and an HFPT. When injury prevention was calculated using published data on activation rates for "active" safety devices, the number fell to as low as 12 for safety scalpel and to 61 for the combination of a single-handed scalpel blade remover and an HFPT. Conclusion; Both safety strategies are potentially effective in reducing scalpel blade injuries. However the safety scalpels are active devices and as such are subject to widely variable activation rates. We recommend use of a single-handed scalpel blade remover in combination with an HFPT as this can potentially prevent 5 times as many injuries as safety scalpels.
机译：背景：本研究的目的是分析和比较两种安全策略在减少手术刀刀片损伤方面的潜在有效性。所研究的两种策略是安全手术刀与单手手术刀刀片去除器结合免提通过技术（HFPT）（例如通过托盘或中性区）。方法：这是一项回顾性研究，涉及对一个拥有550张床的成人都市大专转诊医院的急诊损伤数据库进行回顾，对图表进行回顾，并对这些数据进行假设性建模以确定潜在的可预防伤害。建模进行了两次，首先假设每个安全设备的有效性为100％，其次使用先前发布的“主动”安全设备的激活率，这些激活率被认为是对现实生活中工作实践的更准确反映。结果：1987年至2003年之间共报告了141例手术刀受伤。其中有137例受伤了。使用手术刀时，仅有不到50％的人受伤，并且这些伤害是无法预防的。假设每个安全装置的有效性为100％，则安全手术刀可防止72例受伤，单手手术刀刀片拆卸器和HFPT的组合可防止69例受伤。当使用已发布的有关“主动”安全装置的启动率的数据来计算伤害预防时，安全手术刀的数量降至低至12，而单手手术刀刀片拆卸器和HFPT的组合降至61。结论;两种安全策略在减少手术刀刀片损伤方面均可能有效。但是，安全手术刀是有源设备，因此受激活率的影响很大。我们建议将单手手术刀刀片拆卸器与HFPT结合使用，因为这可以预防的伤害可能是安全手术刀的5倍。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号