Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Users Online: 29481

 

Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Advertise Contacts Login 
     

  Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 55  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 220-223  

Surgeon's satisfaction on the use of invented needle magnet in reducing the risk of sharp injuries in the operating room


1 Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Shiraz HIV/AIDS Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Shiraz HIV/AIDS Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
3 Associate Professor of Infectious Diseases, Shiraz HIV/AIDS Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

Date of Web Publication7-May-2014

Correspondence Address:
Mohammad Ali Davarpanah
Internal Medicine Office, Nemazi Hospital, Shiraz
Iran
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0300-1652.132044

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 

Background: Healthcare workers, especially operating room personnel, are at increased risk for sharps injury and transmission of blood-borne pathogens as a result of their occupation. Infection with these pathogens occurs mainly by percutaneous or mucocutaneous exposure to blood-borne pathogens. This study evaluated the effectiveness of using invented needle magnet in reducing the risk of sharp injuries in the operating room. Materials and Methods: The needle magnet device is consisted of three parts: a cap, a magnet and a metal container. It was invented by the authors for the first time in Iran. The average weight of this device is 200 g and it can be easily placed near the surgery field or on the myostand. It has magnetic properties that attracts the sharp pointed particles during surgery and preserve them in a protected space. The device was used in surgical field by 33 surgeons during 90 surgical operations. Then, the satisfaction of participants and effectiveness of the device in protection against sharps injury was evaluated by a questionnaire. Results: Thirty-one surgeons (94%) believed that needle magnet reduces dispersion of sharp instruments; 79% of the participants suggested that our device reduces sharps injury during operation; 29 surgeons (88%) intended to use this device during operation. Thus, the use of needle magnet within surgical field may reduce the chances of sharps injury during surgery. Conclusion: The use of needle magnet within surgical field reduces the chance of sharp injury during surgery and the surgeons were satisfied with its use.

Keywords: Blood-borne pathogens, needle magnet, sharps injury, surgery


How to cite this article:
Rahmati H, Sharif F, Davarpanah MA. Surgeon's satisfaction on the use of invented needle magnet in reducing the risk of sharp injuries in the operating room. Niger Med J 2014;55:220-3

How to cite this URL:
Rahmati H, Sharif F, Davarpanah MA. Surgeon's satisfaction on the use of invented needle magnet in reducing the risk of sharp injuries in the operating room. Niger Med J [serial online] 2014 [cited 2024 Mar 28];55:220-3. Available from: https://www.nigeriamedj.com/text.asp?2014/55/3/220/132044


   Introduction Top


Surgeons and healthcare workers (HCWs) have always had a high risk of exposure to blood-borne pathogens as a result of their occupation. Infection with these pathogens occurs mainly by precutaneous or mucocutaneous exposure to blood-borne pathogens. Precutaneous exposure is particularly due to needle sticks or cuts from other sharp instruments contaminated with the blood of infected patients. [1]

The risk of precutaneous and mucocutaneous exposure for operating room personnel has been investigated. A cross-sectional study analyzed the incidence of occupational exposure to blood and body fluids (BBF) among 1144 hospital-based HCWs during April to May 2004. The total incidence of exposures was 66.3% of HCWs per year. The highest percentage of precutaneous injuries occurred during a surgical operation (22.8%). Among sharp instruments, the suture needle was the most common cause of precutaneous injuries (24.7%). [2] The risk of precutaneous injuries during 60583 operations was evaluated during another study. Operating room personnel reported 6.4 BBF exposures per 1000 surgical procedures. Increase in estimated blood loss, increased number of personnel working in the surgical field and increased surgical procedures duration were associated with higher risk of exposure. Suture needle-related exposures have a stronger association with the above factors. [3]

The prevalence and nature of intra-operative injuries to hand surgeons during hand surgery was evaluated among members of American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH). The risk of sharp injury was 97% for a hand surgeon in practice for more than 10 years. The index finger of the left hand (94%) was the most likely site of injury. The suture needle was the most common cause (91% of cases). [4] The incidence and reporting rate of needle-stick injuries was questioned from 42 surgeons in a general hospital in the UK. There were 840 needle-stick injuries over 2 years. Of the total number of injuries, only 19 (2.26%) were reported to Occupational Health. [5]

This study was conducted to determine the efficacy of inventory needle magnet used during surgeries.


   Materials and methods Top


The needle magnet device consist of three parts: a cap, a magnet and a metal container [Figure 1]. The average weight of this device is 200 g and it can be easily placed near the surgery field or on the myostand. It has magnetic properties that attracts the sharp pointed articles during surgery and preserve them in a protected space. Thus, there would not be any hazards for the surgeon in presence of sharp pointed and cutting particles with the use of this device [Figure 2].
Figure 1: Needle magnet device consist of three parts: a cap, a magnet and a metal container

Click here to view
Figure 2: The surgeon has no hazards in using needle magnet device

Click here to view


The device was successfully used during surgeries by 33 university faculty members within 90 operations such as general surgeries, neurosurgeries and urology, orthopaedic, obstetrics and gynaecologic surgeries. The operations were undertaken in two academic hospitals of Faghihi and Nemazee, affiliated to Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. The satisfaction of participating surgeons and the effectiveness of the device in protection against sharps injury were evaluated using a questionnaire. The items in the questionnaire included the effect of needle magnet on reduction in sharp objects dispersion, prevention of blood-borne pathogens transmission, reduction in needle-stick injuries during operation, capability for sharp devices collection, effect on the duration of operation, technical difficulties induced by the device and, finally, satisfaction rate from device usage.


   Results Top


In our study, 33 surgeons participated, including 15 general surgeons, 8 gynaecologists, 5 urologists and 5 orthopaedic surgeons. Thirty-one surgeons (94% of all participants) believed that using needle magnet was effective in collection of sharp objects, reduced dispersion of such objects within the operation field and in removing the sharp devices at the end of operation. Twenty-eight surgeons (85%) considered that needle magnet would protect surgeons against blood-born pathogens. As many as 79% of participants believed that our device reduced sharps injury during operation, while 88% were satisfied with the use of this device. Twenty-nine surgeons (88%) intended to use the needle magnet during their operations. On the other hand, 48% and 30% of the surgeons believed that using this device prolonged the operation and induced technical difficulties, respectively.


   Discussion Top


Some policies have been proposed for lessening of sharps injuries during surgery. It include use of blunted suture needles for internal suturing-fascia/muscle, [6],[7] hands-free technique, [8] double gloves wearing during surgery, [9],[10] and prohibition of HIV and HBV infected surgeons from procedures that have increased risk of exposure. [11]

Our needle magnet device is a simple and cheap equipment that can efficiently reduce the risk of sharps injury that lead to transmission of blood-borne pathogens. The operating room is the hospital environment with the greatest concentration of sharp instruments. Mohrenschlager and colleagues presented a magnetic device that enabled the surgeon and other staff members working in the operating room to locate a lost needle on the floor rapidly. [12] Myers presented a magnetic sweeper to find and remove the suture needle without any risk of precutaneous injury and to avoid the anxiety of a missing surgical needle. [13]

Surgeons sustain most precutaneous injuries when they are suturing. The index finger of the non dominant hand is the most common part of body that is injured. Double gloving may decrease the risk of needle injury. The efficacy of double gloving in order to decrease risk of needle injury during major and minor orthopaedic surgeries was evaluated in a previous study. [14] A total number of 1528 gloves (622 inner and 906 outer) used in 200 surgical procedures (100 major, 100 minor) and 100 pairs of unused gloves were examined. Overall perforation rate was 15.8%. Perforation rates for major and minor surgical procedures were 21.6% and 3.6%, respectively. The perforation rate for the unused control group was 1%. Inner and outer gloves perforation rates were 3.7% and 22.7%, respectively. [14] In one study, the clinical use of a blunt suture needle and an absorbable skin staple in upper limb operation was evaluated. These needles may reduce the need for sharp needles during selected procedures on the upper limb. [15]

The hands-free technique for transferring sharp instruments is a work practice that has been proposed for reducing the risk of such contamination. [16] In this technique, instruments are indirectly transferred between surgeons and other personnel so that only one person palpates the same sharp device at any time. Instruments are usually placed in a safe zone within the surgical field or a container, from where they can be retrieved. [17]

The National Alliance for the Primary Prevention of Sharps injury (NAPPSI) has published a list of needle-stick safety devices. The devices within each medical application have been categorized into primary and secondary prevention devices. Primary prevention devices are the first line of protection against needle-stick injury that reduces the use of sharps during surgery. Secondary prevention practices make the sharp items used within surgical field safer. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has recommended that healthcare workers avoid the use of needles where safe and effective alternatives are available. [18]

Blunt-tip suture needles are identified by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to reduce precutaneous injuries. Because as many as 59% of suture needle injuries happens during suturing of tissues under skin, replacement of conventional sharp-tip suture needles with blunt-tip suture needles for suturing of muscle and fascia will reduce the injury of surgical personnel. One CDC-based study in a gynaecological surgery field revealed a statistically significant reduction of injury if blunt-tip suture needles were used. [19] Kunishige et al., have presented a surgical pearl that may reduce the risk of sharps injury during instrument hand-off and when retrieving instruments from the surgical tray. [20]

 
   References Top

1.Wong KC, Leung KS. Transmission and prevention of occupation infections in orthopedic surgeons. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004;86:1065-76.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.Zhang M, Wang H, Miao J, Du X, Li T, Wu Z. Occupational exposure to blood and body fluids among health care workers in a general hospital, China. Am J Ind Med 2009;52:89-98.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.Myers DJ, Epling C, Dement J, Hunt D. Risk of sharp device-related blood and body fluid exposure in operating room. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29:1139-48.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.Lopez RA, Rayan GM, Monlux R. Hand injuries during hand surgery: A survey of intraoperative sharps injuries of the hand among hand surgeons. J Hand Surg Eur 2008;33:661-6.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.Au E, Gossage JA, Bailey SR. The reporting of needlestick injuries sustained in theatre by surgeons: Are we under-reporting? J Hosp Infect 2008;70:66-70.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.From the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Evaluation of blunt suture needles in preventing percutaneous injuries among health-care workers during gynecologic surgical procedures - New York City, March 1993-June 1994. JAMA 1997;277:451-2.  Back to cited text no. 6
[PUBMED]    
7.Mingoli A, Sapienza P, Sgarzini G, Luciani G, De Angelis G, Modini C, et al. Influence of blunt needles on surgical glove perforation and safety for the surgeon. Am J Surg 1996;172:512-6.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.Raahave D. Operative precautions in HIV and other bloodborne virus diseases. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1996;17:529-31.  Back to cited text no. 8
[PUBMED]    
9.Mast ST, Woolwine JD, Gerberding JL. Efficacy of gloves in reducing blood volumes transferred during simulated needle stick injury. J Infect Dis 1993;168:1589-92.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.Quebbeman EJ, Telford GL, Hubbard S, Wadsworth K, Hardman B, Goodman H, et al. Risk of blood contamination and injury to operating room personnel. Ann Surg 1991;214:614-20.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.Risks to surgeons and patients from HIV and hepatitis: Guidelines on precautions and management of exposure to blood or body fluids. Joint Working Party of the Hospital Infection Society and the Surgical Infection Study Group. BMJ 1992;305:1337-43.  Back to cited text no. 11
[PUBMED]    
12.Mohrenschlager M, Ring J, Henkel V, Jessberger B. Lost needle: A simple search device for the operating room's floor. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2008;393:1009-11.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.Cook J. A safe and effective method to recover missing surgical needles. Dermatol Surg 2008;34:423.  Back to cited text no. 13
[PUBMED]    
14.Ersozlu S, Sahin O, Ozgur AF, Akkaya T, Tuncay C. Glove punctures in major and minor orthopaedic surgery with double gloving. Acta Orthop Belg 2007;73:760-4.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.Tate DE Jr. Technical tip: New tools for protection from sharps injuries. Hand (N Y) 2007;2:135-6.  Back to cited text no. 15
[PUBMED]    
16.Recommended practices for standard and the transmission-based precautions in the preoperative practice setting. American Association of Operating Room Nurses. AORN J 1999;69:404-6, 409-11.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.Stringer B, Infante-Rivard C, Hanley JA. Effectiveness of the hands-free technique in reducing operating theatre injuries. Occup Environ Med 2002;59:703-7.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.Infection Control Today. NAPPSI Compiles List of Sharp-Safety Devices.02.01.2003. Available from: online:http://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/articles/321 feat3.html [Last accessed on 2014 Mar 5].  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.Association of Perioperative Registered Nurses (AORN). AORN Guidance Statement: Sharps injury prevention in setting. In: 2005 Standards, Recommended Practices, and Guidelines (2005); 199-204. Available from: www.aorn.org/about/positions/pdf/SECTI-2esharpssafety.pdf [Last accessed on 2013 Sep 25].  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.Kunishige J, Wanitphakdeedecha R, Nguyen TH, Chen TM. Surgical Pearl: A simple means of disarming the" locked and loaded" needle. Int J Dermtol 2008;47:848-9.  Back to cited text no. 20
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2]


This article has been cited by
1 Effect of using an innovative tool for organizing surgical sutures on the self-efficacy of the scrub nurse during surgery
Fatemeh Shah Nazari, Ahmad Ghadami, Ali Hajihashemi
Perioperative Care and Operating Room Management. 2022; : 100256
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 The Early Results of Vertebral Pathological Compression Fracture of Extra- nodal Lymphoma with HIV-positive Patients Treated by Percutaneous Kyphoplasty
Sheng Sun,Biao Xu,Qiang Zhang,Chang-song Zhao,Rui Ma,Jie He,Yao Zhang
Current HIV Research. 2020; 18(4): 248
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 Modified Small Incision Cataract Surgery and Intraocular Lens Implantation in HIV Patients
Kagmeni Giles,Christelle Domngang,Georges Nguefack-Tsague,Ebana Mvogo Come,Peter Wiedemann
Ophthalmology and Eye Diseases. 2015; 7: OED.S31013
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
  
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    Abstract
   Introduction
    Materials and me...
   Results
   Discussion
    References
    Article Figures

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed4140    
    Printed179    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded115    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 3    

Recommend this journal