CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 15Chemical Safety and Risk ManagementClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlOccupational Health and Safety in Workplaces

How compliant are technicians with universal safety measures in medical laboratories in Croatia? – A pilot study

Open access
Dukic, Kristina, Zoric, Matea, Pozaic, Petra, Starcic, Jelena, Culjak, Marija, Saracevic, Andrea, Miler, Marijana·2015·Biochemia Medica
DOI 10.11613/bm.2015.038PMC PMC4622193
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This pilot study aimed to investigate the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) and compliance to the code of conduct (rules defined in institutional, governmental and professional guidelines) among laboratory technicians in Croatian medical laboratories. In addition, we explored the differences in compliance between participants of different age groups, laboratory ownership and accreditation status. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An anonymous and voluntary survey with 15 questions was conducted among Croatian medical laboratory technicians (N=217). The questions were divided into two groups: demographic characteristics and the use of PPE. The questions of the second part were graded according to the Likert scale (1-4) and an overall score, shown as median and range (min-max), was calculated for each participant. Differences between the overall scores were tested for each group of participants. RESULTS: The majority of participants always wear protective clothes at work, 38.7% of them always wear gloves in daily routine, more than 30.0% consume food and almost half of them drink beverages at workplace. A significantly lower overall score was found for participants working in public compared to private laboratories (36 (16-40) vs. 40 (31-40), P<0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in overall scores for participants of different age groups (P=0.456) and laboratory accreditation status (P=0.081). CONCLUSION: A considerable percentage of laboratory technicians in Croatian medical laboratories do not comply with safety measures. Lack of compliance is observed in all personnel regardless laboratory accreditation and participants' age. However, those working in private laboratories adhere more to the code of conduct.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.11613/bm.2015.038

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Gloves are not widely used among healthcare workers.

    “Unfortunately, the evidence shows that gloves are not widely used among healthcare workers [48].”

    From Joint EFLM-COLABIOCLI Recommendation for venous blood sampling (2018) · cites this paper as [48]

    The Study design table reports that 38.7% of surveyed Croatian laboratory technicians always wore gloves in their daily routine; the Discussion says 61.3% did not always wear them. This supports a claim about inconsistent glove use among those technicians, but not the broader statement that gloves are not widely used among healthcare workers generally. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 20

  1. [1]Siegel JD, Rhinehart E, Jackson M, Chiarello L. Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Guideline for Isolation Precautions: Preventing Transmission of Infectious Agents in Healthcare Settings, 2007. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/pdf/isolation2007.pdf. Accessed March 9th 2015. PMC7119119 18068815
  2. [3]Kaić B Vilibic Cavlek T Filipovic SK Nemethblaẑic T Pem‐Novosel I Vucina VV. Epidemiologija virusnih hepatitisa. Acta Med Croatica. 2013; 67: 273– 9. 24984326
  3. [4]Čivljak R Begovac J. Profesionalna ekspozicija zdravstvenih djelatnika infekcijama koje se prenose krvlju. Infektološki glasnik. 2003;23:183-8.
  4. [5]Jagger J Perry J Parker G. Lab workers: small group, big risk. Nursing. 2003; 33: 72. 10.1097/00152193-200301000-00049 12555758 · DOI
  5. [7]Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Clinical Laboratory Safety; Approved Guideline-Third Edition. CLSI GP17-A3 document. North Ft. Myers, Florida, USA; 2012.
  6. [8]Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Protection of Laboratory Workers from Occupationally Acquired Infections; Approved Guideline-Fourth Edition. CLSI M29-A4 document. Wayne, PA; 2014.
  7. [10]Melo DS Tipple AFV Neves ZCPD Pereira MS. Nurses’ understanding of standard precautions at a public hospital in Goiania-GO, Brazil. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2006; 14: 720– 7. 10.1590/S0104-11692006000500013 17117256 · DOI
  8. [11]Efstathiou G Papastavrou E Raftopoulos V Merkouris A. Factors influencing nurses’ compliance with Standard Precautions in order to avoid occupational exposure to microorganisms: A focus group study. BMC Nurs. 2011; 10: 1. 10.1186/1472-6955-10-1 21255419 PMC3033845 · DOI
  9. [13]Simundic AM Church S Cornes MP Grankvist K Lippi G Nybo M Compliance of blood sampling procedures with the CLSI H3-A6 guidelines: An observational study by the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) working group for the preanalytical phase (WG-PRE). Clin Chem Lab Med. 2015; •••: Epub ahead of print 10.1515/cclm-2014-1053 25536667 · DOI
  10. [14]Main CL Carusone SC Davis K Loeb M. Compliance with personal precautions against exposure to bloodborne pathogens among laboratory workers: a Canadian survey. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2008; 29: 66– 8. 10.1086/524325 18171190 · DOI
  11. [15]Akhter J Al Johani S Hammad L Al Zahrani K Laboratory work practices and occupational hazards among laboratory health care workers: A health and safety survey. J Pharm Biomed Sci. 2011; 9: 1– 4.
  12. [16]Abdulraheem IS Amodu MO Saka MJ Bolarinwa OA Uthman MMB Knowledge, Awareness and Compliance with Standard Precautions among Health Workers in North Eastearn Nigeria. J Community Med Health Educ. 2012; 2: 131.
  13. [17]Alice TE Danny A Knowledge and practice of infection control among health workers in a tertiary hospital in Edo state, Nigeria. Direct Res J Health Pharm. 2013; 1: 20– 7.
  14. [18]Abubakar SM Haruna H Teryila KR Hamina D Ahmadu I Babaji M Assessment of knowledge and practice of standard precautions among nurses working at Federal Medical Centre Gombe, Nigeria. Direct Res J Health Pharm. 2015; 3: 1– 11.
  15. [19]Luo Y He GP Zhou JW Luo Y. Factors impacting compliance with standard precautions in nursing, China. Int J Infect Dis. 2010; 14: e1106– 14. 10.1016/j.ijid.2009.03.037 21071254 PMC7110552 · DOI
  16. [20]Phukan P. Compliance to occupational safety measures among the paramedical workers in a tertiary hospital in Karnataka, South India. Int J Occup Environ Med. 2014; 5: 40– 50. 24463800 PMC7767592
  17. [21]Fayaz SH Higuchi M Hirosawa T Sarker MA Djabbarova Z Hamajima N. Knowledge and practice of universal precautions among health care workers in four national hospitals in Kabul, Afghanistan. J Infect Dev Ctries. 2014; 8: 535– 42. 10.3855/jidc.4143 24727521 · DOI
  18. [23]Aksoy U Ozdemir MH Usluca S Toprak Ergönen A. Biosafety profile of laboratory workers at three education hospitals in Izmir, Turkey. Mikrobiyol Bul. 2008; 42: 469– 76. 18822891
  19. [24]Nasim S Shahid A Mustufa MA Arain GM Ali G Taseer IU Biosafety perspective of clinical laboratory workers: a profile of Pakistan. J Infect Dev Ctries. 2012; 6: 611– 9. 10.3855/jidc.2236 22910567 · DOI
  20. [25]Nasim S Shahid A Mustufa MA Kazmi SU Siddiqui TR Mohiuddins Practices and awareness regarding biosafety measures among laboratory technicians working in clinical laboratories in Karachi, Pakistan. Appl Biosaf. 2010; 15: 172– 9.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dukic, K., Zoric, M., Pozaic, P., Starcic, J., Culjak, M., Saracevic, A., & Miler, M.
Affiliations
  • Klinička bolnica Merkur (HR)
  • University Hospital Centre Zagreb (HR)
ORCID
Miler, Marijana
Venue
Biochemia Medica
Publisher
Croatian Society for Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine
Published
2015
Volume
25
Issue
3
Pages
386-392
ISSN
  • 1330-0962 (ISSN-L)
  • 1846-7482
DOI
10.11613/bm.2015.038
PMC
PMC4622193
OpenAlex
W2412756058
Cited by
15
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2
FWCI
16.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Biochemia Medica (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemical Engineering › Chemical Health and Safety › Chemical Safety and Risk Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Safety in Workplaces
Keywords
personal protective equipment, occupational safety, laboratory technicians, medical laboratories, glove use, laboratory accreditation, age differences, Croatia
MeSH terms
Personal Protective Equipment, Accreditation, Adolescent, Adult, Attitude of Health Personnel, Cross-Sectional Studies, Drinking Behavior, Feeding Behavior, Female, Hospitals, General, Hospitals, University, Humans, Laboratories, Hospital, Male, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Primary Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Universal Precautions, Medical Laboratory Personnel, Workplace, Croatia, Total Quality Management, Health Care Surveys, Guideline Adherence, Young Adult, Self Report

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review