Medical Center

Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Personal tools

Site Logins
Home > International Healthcare Worker Safety Center > aep > index61.html



AEP: Summary of latest issue

Volume 6, Number 1, 2002 (released February 2002)

“OSHA’s 2001 Updated Compliance Directive: Guidance on New Requirements of Bloodborne Pathogens Standard” (pp. 1,6,9). OSHA released an updated compliance directive for the Bloodborne Pathogens (BP) standard on 11/27/01, the second time in two years the directive has been revised. It was updated to reflect the major new requirements of the BP standard related to exposure control plans, evaluation of safety devices, and maintenance of sharps injury logs. It also addresses issues such as removal of phlebotomy needles from blood tube holders and use of unwinders in sharps containers.

“Device Update: Prefilled Syringes” (p. 2). Discusses new developments related to safety prefilled syringes.

Jagger J, Parker G, Perry J. “Japanese-U.S. Collaborative Program: Sharing Data, Learning Lessons” (pp. 3-5).  Describes a collaborative initiative between the International Health Care Worker Safety Center at the University of Virginia and the Research Group for Occupational Infection Control and Prevention in Japan, a primary goal of which is to better understand comparative occupational exposure risks in different countries. Japanese researchers adapted the EPINet surveillance system for use in Japan, and have collected three years of sharps injury data from more than 300 Japanese hospitals. The article compares the Japanese and U.S. sharps injury data, and describes some of the characteristics of the Japanese health care system that help account for differences in the data from the two countries.

“EPINet Report: 1999 Percutaneous Injury Rates” (p. 7-8).  Discusses the 1999 EPINet data from 21 U.S. health care facilities

“Using Denominators to Calculate Percutaneous Injury Rates” (p. 8). Sharps injury data collected by health care facilities can be used to calculate needlestick rates and make comparisons among different professional groups, device categories and clinical settings. This article describes three different methods for calculating needlestick rates, using three different denominators. Which denominator is chosen depends on what questions need to be answered.

“Uniform Needlestick and Sharp-Object Injury Report, U.S. EPINet Network, 1999, 21 Health Care Facilities” (pp. 10).  EPINet data report for 1999; total cases = 1,996.

“Uniform Blood and Body Fluid Exposure Report, U.S. EPINet Network, 1999, 14 Health Care Facilities” (pp. 10).  EPINet data report for 1999; total cases = 500.

For information onhow to subscribe to AEP, click here