Case Study about Healthcare 2022

Running head: HEALTH CARE
Health care
Name of the student:
Name of the University:
Author’s note

1HEALTH CARE
Problem statement:
The prevalence of needle stick injuries (NSI) is a major health burden and occupation risk
for health care workers as approximately 3 million health care workers (HCW) are exposed to
such injuries during daily practice. NSIs are mainly caused by injury through objects like needles
and cannula which are contaminated with blood borne viruses. This form of injury exposes
HCWs to risk of fatal infections like hepatitis C virus (HCV) and human immunodeficiency
virus (HIV) (Kebede & Gerensea, 2018). Considering the nature of working condition of health
care worker particularly nurse, they are at high risk of occupation hazards because of injury
through sharp objects. In an effort to prevent the burden of NSIs, past research evaluated many
interventions to reduce the rate of NSIs. A systematic review regarding interventions to prevent
needle stick injury revealed the potential of educational interventions, safety devices and training
to reduce risk of infectious disease (Kazi & Bhuiyan, 2018). The study revealed better results in
reducing NSI by combining safety device with education intervention. The main advantage that
SEDs provide includes design innovations to prevent accidental injuries occurring during use of
devices like needles (Griswold et al., 2013). However, in health care setting of many developing
countries, there is lack of usage of needle with safety devices. Another controversy surrounding
the use of safety device is that presence of organizational and situational barriers and lack of
awareness regarding the benefits of using these devices for patient and staff safety. To promote
safe environment for HCWs, there is a need to find and critically evaluate studies investigating
only about the outcomes associated with use of SEDs. Comparison of findings of these studies
will help to create awareness and implement programs to increase use of such devices in clinical
setting. Hence, the aim of this research is to find evidence for the effectiveness of SEDs in
preventing NSIs or sharp injuries.

2HEALTH CARE
Approach:
Search strategy: The search for literatures on the topic is guided by a relevant research question
which is as follows:
What is the effectiveness of SEDs in preventing NSIs among HCWS in hospital setting?
The significance of this research question is that it clearly defines the population (Health
care workers), intervention (SEDs), comparator (no hand washing) and outcome of interest
(preventing NSIs) for the research. The significant of a clear and focused PICO question is that it
helps to effectively plan search strategy and easily retrieve literature relevant to the search topic.
The search for articles was done in PubMed and CINAHL. The main rationale behind
choosing articles from these databases is that these databases are renowned databases that
publishes peer reviewing journal from across the world in the field of health care, biomedical and
nursing. Hence, there is high possibility to get high quality journal articles related to the research
question from these databases. Key search terms were developed by using phrases from the
PICO question and some primary search terms that were used to search for evidence included
‘safety engineered device’, ‘safety devices’, ‘needle stick injuries’, ‘sharp object injuries’, ‘sharp
injuries’, ‘prevention’, ‘reduction’, ‘health care workers’ and ‘health care setting. The search
process was further enhanced by the use of Boolean operators like AND and OR. The primary
search terms were combined with Boolean operators in the following ways:
 Safety engineered device AND needle stick injuries
 Safety devices AND prevention of NSIs
 Safety devices AND reduction in NSI among HCWs
 Safety devices AND rate of NSI

3HEALTH CARE
 Safety devices AND health workers.
After retrieving articles based on the use of above search terms, the abstract and title of the
articles were reviewed first to assess whether it answers the research question or not. Articles
which did not matched the above search terms were excluded and the rest of the articles were
assessed based on inclusion and exclusion criteria which is discussed below.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria:
The key inclusion criteria for the article selection were as follows:
 Type of literature sources: Both primary research studies and systematic review papers
were included in the review Publication date: Articles published from 2010 to 2019 were only taken
 Type of intervention: Only those papers were taken which evaluated the use of SEDs in
clinical setting
 Outcome: The included papers must assess outcomes related to reduction or prevention of
NSIs
 Language: Research published only in English language were taken in the review
The key exclusion criteria for the research are as follows:
 Research studies published before 2012 were excluded
 Papers published in language other than English
 Research papers reporting about other interventions other than NSI
 The paper which evaluated other outcomes other than rate of NSIs
 Paper with topics other than NSI prevention