↓ Skip to main content

Understanding sharps injuries in home healthcare: The Safe Home Care qualitative methods study to identify pathways for injury prevention

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Understanding sharps injuries in home healthcare: The Safe Home Care qualitative methods study to identify pathways for injury prevention
Published in
BMC Public Health, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-1673-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pia Markkanen, Catherine Galligan, Angela Laramie, June Fisher, Susan Sama, Margaret Quinn

Abstract

Home healthcare is one of the fastest growing sectors in the United States. Percutaneous injuries from sharp medical devices (sharps) are a source of bloodborne pathogen infections among home healthcare workers and community members. Sharps use and disposal practices in the home are highly variable and there is no comprehensive analysis of the system of sharps procurement, use and disposal in home healthcare. This gap is a barrier to effective public health interventions. The objectives of this study were to i) identify the full range of pathways by which sharps enter and exit the home, stakeholders involved, and barriers for using sharps with injury prevention features; and ii) assess the leverage points for preventive interventions. This study employed qualitative research methods to develop two systems maps of the use of sharps and prevention of sharps injuries in home healthcare. Twenty-six in-depth interview sessions were conducted including home healthcare agency clinicians, public health practitioners, sharps device manufacturers, injury prevention advocates, pharmacists and others. Interview transcripts were audio-recorded and analyzed thematically using NVIVO qualitative research analysis software. Analysis of supporting archival material also was conducted. All findings guided development of the two maps. Sharps enter the home via multiple complex pathways involving home healthcare providers and home users. The providers reported using sharps with injury prevention features. However, home users' sharps seldom had injury prevention features and sharps were commonly re-used for convenience and cost-savings. Improperly discarded sharps present hazards to caregivers, waste handlers, and community members. The most effective intervention potential exists at the beginning of the sharps systems maps where interventions can eliminate or minimize sharps injuries, in particular with needleless treatment methods and sharps with injury prevention features. Manufacturers and insurance providers can improve safety with more affordable and accessible sharps with injury prevention features for home users. Sharps disposal campaigns, free-of-charge disposal containers, and convenient disposal options remain essential. Sharps injuries are preventable through public health actions that promote needleless treatment methods, sharps with injury prevention features, and safe disposal practices. Communication about hazards regarding sharps is needed for all home healthcare stakeholders.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
Ghana 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 93 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 19%
Student > Bachelor 14 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Researcher 6 6%
Other 5 5%
Other 19 20%
Unknown 23 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 11%
Engineering 7 7%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 29 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 January 2016.
All research outputs
#22,804,735
of 25,424,630 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#16,501
of 17,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,261
of 279,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#243
of 264 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,424,630 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,577 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 279,275 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 264 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.