Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Evaluate the efficiency of adopting the automated needle processing system by evaluating efficiency, usability and safety when using ANDY(Automatic Needle Destroyer). Install ANDY(Automatic Needle Destroyer) in the ER, and evaluate the system by comparing the efficiency of the work, usability, actual decrease ratio of needlestick injury between using the automated needle processing system and not using it.
Background The most frequent occupational injury is exposure to blood and fluid by needlestick injury. Needlestick injuries can result in serious infections if appropriate infection control measures are not taken promptly.
Since the use of safety devices are not popularly used, the needle and syringe are mostly taken into pieces by physical ways. There are some cases that the needle and syringe is not separated, and the entire syringe can be put directly into the waste container. There is also a problem that it takes a lot of time and efforts to remove needles from syringes. In addition, the existing safety mechanism is physical methods such as pulling out the needle, damaging or cutting the needle, or using heat to the needle, or melting it by using chemicals. It is a semi-manual since you have to wait holding the syringe during the process, and it is inconvenient to use considering a busy medical environment.
Therefore, we developed ANDY(Automatic Needle Destroyer) that can be introduced at a convenient and reasonable cost, and try to objectively evaluate the utility of ANDY in a clinical environment.
Purpose The purpose of this study is to Evaluate the efficiency of adopting the automated needle processing system by evaluating efficiency, usability and safety of the system.
Design : RCT (randomized controlled trial)
Setting: EMERGENCY CENTER at the Samsung Medical Center
Enrollment : 129 medical staffs in the ER. 10ea ANDY and 10ea of Existing waste containers(needle box)
Intervention :
6-1) 1st Week : Removal of needle with existing method
6-2) 2nd week: Prepare for using ANDYs
6-3) 3rd week : Removal of needle with using ANDYs
Scoring: By the answers of the Questionnaire of Satisfaction (SUS and adjective score)
Study period : 3 weeks
Satisfaction survey: SUS and adjective score
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Removal of needle with existing method | No Intervention | Participants will remove needles from syringes with the existing method like they are already doing. (Record the time required for the needle removal procedure by photographing during 24 hours/7 days.) | |
| Removal of needle with using ANDYs | Experimental | Participants will remove needles from syringes with Andy. (Record the time required for the needle removal procedure by photographing during 24 hours/7 days.) |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Removal of needle with using ANDYs | Device |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Time Efficiency: Comparing the time required to remove the needle from syringe for assessing change in time between using automated needle processing system or not | - Comparison of the required time(second) to remove the needle between using the automated needle processing system and not using it. | [1st Week] : Removal of needle in accordance with existing method, [3rd week] : using a ANDY(automated needle processing system) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Usability: Comparing the SUS score for assessing the change in usability between using automated needle processing system or not | - Comparison of the usability between using the automated needle processing system and not using it by doing survey after 1st week and 3rd week and Interview after 3rd week( Scoring by the answers of the Questionnaire of Satisfaction (SUS) and adjective score) | [1st Week] : Removal of needle in accordance with existing method, [3rd week] : using a ANDY(automated needle processing system) |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
•A subject who did not agree with this study
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| TAERIM KIM, Doctoral | Samsung Medical Center | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Samsung Medical Center | Seoul | South Korea |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D016602 | Needlestick Injuries |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D014951 | Wounds, Stab |
| D014950 | Wounds, Penetrating |
| D014947 | Wounds and Injuries |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Safety: Comparing the number of accidents of the needlestick injuries between using automated needle processing system or not | - Comparison of the number of accidents of the needlestick injuries between using the automated needle processing system and not using it. | [1st Week] : Removal of needle in accordance with existing method, [3rd week] : using a ANDY(automated needle processing system) |