الفهرس 
TitleOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 88 |  |  |
| | | from | 88 | | |
Abstract
Blood bank activities have always focused on the blood testing procedures performed, while little attention has been paid to infection control practices.
Exposure to blood and body fluids is the most common occupational hazard in health care workers Health care staff working in blood banks and transfusion services are at risk of exposure to blood borne pathogens
In addition to preventing the transmission of infection to blood recipients, blood banks must also adhere to infection control (IC) standards in order to prevent the spread of blood-borne pathogens. Effective policies to ensure that staff in blood banks do not become infected, and the safe disposal of waste generated in a blood bank, are important to control the spread of blood borne infections to patients, staff and the community.
Therefore the purpose of this study was to evaluate infection control practices in different blood banks with respect to safe blood supply, staff safety, assessed adherence of physicians, nurses, chemists and technicians to infection control guidelines and asses the decontamination process of surfaces using environmental
This study was conducted within time period of within time period of 7 months (September 2020 to March 2021) in 3 governmental blood banks in Egypt (2 regional and one university), each blood bank had four different departments (Serology, Component, donation and Issuing).
The total number of the study participants was 110 and divided into 14 physicians, 18 chemists, 42 technicians, 22 nurses and 14 House keepers.
Data was collected using three tools; (questionnaire, observational checklists and interventional), A structured questionnaire was used to assess Blood banks staff knowledge about infection control guidelines, two observational checklists were Used, one at the start to assess the basic available resources needed for infection control practices, The second to assess adherence of Blood banks staff, including (physicians, chemists, technicians, nurses) to infection control guidelines twice weekly for a period of three months, Interventional by taking environmental swabs from different contact surfaces (donor chair - donor table in donation department) - and work benches from laboratories of (Issuing, Component Preparation and Serology departments) were collected after cleaning and disinfection using sodium hypochlorite (500ppm) to assess the efficacy of decontamination process of surfaces, swabs were collected twice monthly for a period of three months.
The result of the study showed that the majority of participants were female (60%); while the rest were male (40%). Concerning to their occupation, (38.2%) of studied participants were technicians, (20%) of them were nurses, (16.4%) of them were chemists, while (12.7%) of them were physicians and the same percentage were housekeepers.
Summary, Conclusion and Recommendations
51
Only (9.1%) of participant knew the need of individual training annually on infection control practices, (86.4%) of employees received HB Vaccination and (80%) of employees completed vaccination all 3 doses, while none of them did post vaccination screening for development.
87.3% of the participants answered correctly about Wearing gloves when there is potential for exposure to blood (e.g. finger sticks, venipuncture, lab procedures, handling blood products, collecting waste, etc.). Workload was the commonest reported cause for non-adherence (64.3%), Loss of sensation (14.3%), and the same percentage was non availability of suitable size (14.3%), the least cause of non-adherence was being Allergic to glove (7.1%).Only (22.7%) of participants answered correctly about Wearing eye protection and plastic for any operation that may result in splashing of potentially infectious materials aprons. Awareness about likelihood of becoming infected with blood borne pathogens was recorded (100%)
20% of HCWs were exposed to occupational exposure (needle sticks injury or eye splashes, cuts wounds. etc.), Among 22 of the participants who exposed to occupational exposure, 16 (72.7 %) reported that they were injured during two handed recapping of needles, while, 4(18.2%)reported were exposed to eye splash (lab procedures) and 2(9.1%) were injured during was collection, among 22 of the participants who exposed to occupational exposure, 16 (72.7 %) reported that they were injured during two handed recapping, while, 4(18.2%)reported were exposed to eye splash (lab procedures) and 2(9.1%) were injured during waste collection.
Regarding management of post exposure prophylaxis, 17 out of 22 participants managed occupational exposure, from them (88.2%) washed exposure site with soap and water, (29.4%) Performed post exposure serological tests and the same percentage informed infection control team, (29%) squeezed injured site, (11.8%) Cleaned exposure site with antiseptic.
No random culture from blood units were done to detect bacterial contamination at all the studied Blood banks. Also, results showed that none of physicians, nurses, chemists and technicians performed Hand hygiene before starting work, only (15.9 %) of the nurses performed hand hygiene between donors and only (14.5%) of Chemists and technicians performed Hand hygiene after the procedure. Needles of blood bags were recapped after donation procedure in all observations (100%). Also, None of Chemists and technicians wore eye protection and plastic aprons for any operation that may result in splashing of potentially infectious materials or Cleaned working surfaces and devices and pipette before the procedure (0%)
In the current study when random swabs were taken from environmental surfaces in blood banks it was found that, the highest percentage of bacterial growth was among, work bench of Issuing lab, followed by Work bench of Serology (66.7%), followed by work bench of component (61.1%), then donor table(55.6%) and the least percentage was donor chair (44.4%).also, Most of the isolated bacterial cultures (61.1%) were belong environmental contaminants (Bacillus spp and (CONS)) and only (3.3%) was Staphylococcus aureus