Back to Annual Meeting Page		American Public Health Association 133rd Annual Meeting & Exposition December 10-14, 2005 Philadelphia, PA

Abstract #116081

Rahel Mathews, MPH¹, Jack K. Leiss, PhD, MPH¹, Sara Sousa, MPH¹, Jennifer M. Ratcliffe, PhD, MPH¹, Jennifer T. Lyden, BA¹, and Janine Jagger, PhD, MPH². (1) Epidemiology and Surveillance Division, Constella Health Sciences, 2605 Meridian Parkway, Suite 200, Durham, NC 27713, 919-544-8500, rmathews@constellagroup.com, (2) International Health Care Worker Safety Center, University of Virginia Health System, 1224 W. Main Street, Suite 400, Charlottesville, VA 22903

This study describes the availability and use of personal protective equipment and safety devices among a national sample of US paramedics. Using a two-stage sampling scheme, 6,500 paramedics were selected from lists of licensed paramedics provided by ten state licensing agencies. Questionnaires were mailed during September 2002 through February 2003. Participants were asked how often their employer provided the following types of personal protective equipment (PPE): disposable gloves, leather gloves, safety goggles, face/surgical-type masks, full-face shields, fluid-impermeable lab coats, and fluid-impermeable disposable coveralls; and they were asked how often their employer provided the following safety devices: shielded winged steel (butterfly) needles, retracting or shielded lancets, pre-filled or cartridge safety syringes, not pre-filled or cartridge safety syringes, and intravenous catheters with shielded or blunted stylets. Participants were also asked, for the last time they used each of several types of devices (e.g. lancet), whether or not it was a safety device. The adjusted response rate was 55%. Rates of availability and use are presented for the national sample and for California separately, by type of employment (paid vs. volunteer), work setting (city or county, hospital, private) and union at the workplace. Results showed that PPE and safety devices are often unavailable. Fluid-impermeable lab coats and coveralls, butterfly needles, and safety syringes were least available. Rates of availability and use were higher in California than in the national sample. The difference in availability and use in the California and national samples are discussed in relation to blood exposure incidence rates.

Learning Objectives:

• To describe the availability of personal protective equipment among paramedics in the US and in California, by selected job characteristics and demographic variables.
• To describe the availability of safety devices among paramedics in the US and in California, by selected job characteristics and demographic variables.
• To describe the reported use of safety devices among paramedics in the US and in California, by selected job characteristics and demographic variables.
• To compare availability and use in the California vs. the national samples in relation to blood exposure incidence rates.

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

I wish to disclose that I have NO financial interests or other relationship with the manufactures of commercial products, suppliers of commercial services or commercial supporters.