SavedAdd your journal

Journals / TSK Koruyucu Hekimlik Bülteni / 2010 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 6

Çalışma ortamı güvenliği–HIV enfeksiyonundan korunmada maruziyet sonrası profilaksinin yeri

Safety in the working environment– The place of post exposure prophylaxis against HIV infection

Salami Taofik Atanda TİTİLOPE
Samuel Sunday OLOWO
Olarewaju David OLANIYI
Omeife HENRY
Ozeigbe Odigie ENAHORO
Momoh MOJEED
Pages
655–664
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Apart from the basic universal precautions to minimize occupational exposures to HIV virus, the use of post exposure prophylaxis is important when such exposures do occur.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Occupational exposure to HIV virus is a possibility to all workers working with patients having the virus.
📊
Key Findings & Data:HIV post exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is a form of secondary HIV prevention that may reduce the incidence of HIV infection occurring during occupational and non–occupational accidental contact with infectious materials.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Apart from the basic universal precautions to minimize occupational exposures to HIV virus, the use of post exposure prophylaxis is important when such exposures do occur.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Occupational exposure to HIV virus is a possibility to all workers working with patients having the virus. This is particularly more apparent when working within the healthcare setting. HIV post exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is a form of secondary HIV prevention that may reduce the incidence of HIV infection occurring during occupational and non–occupational accidental contact with infectious materials. A lot of studies have shown encouraging evidence of post exposure chemo prophylactic efficacy. It is however not 100% effective in preventing HIV transmission. Apart from the basic universal precautions to minimize occupational exposures to HIV virus, the use of post exposure prophylaxis is important when such exposures do occur.

Özet

HIV virüsü taşıyanlarla beraber çalışanşlarda mesleki olarak HIV virüsünden etkilenme olasılığı bulunmaltadır. Bu durum özellikle sağlık çalışanlarında daha fazla görülmektedir. HIV etkilenimi sonrası profilaksi (PEP); HIV vulaşmış malzemelere kaza ile mesleki ve mesleki olmayan temas sırasında ortaya çıkan HIV enfeksiyonunun sıklığını azaltacak ikincil HIV önleme formudur. Birçok çalışmada etkilenim sonrası kemoterapinin koruyucu etkinliğini destekleyen kanıtlar bulunmuştur. Ancak HIV yayılmasını önlemede %100 etkili değildir. HIV etkileniminden kaynaklanacak mesleki riskleri en aza indirmek için alınan temel evrensel önlemler sonrasında, HIV virüsüne maruziyetin gerçekleşmesi durumunda kullanımı uygundur.

🔖

Cite This Article

TİTİLOPE, S. T. A., OLOWO, S. S., OLANIYI, O. D., HENRY, O., ENAHORO, O. O., MOJEED, M. (2010). Çalışma ortamı güvenliği–HIV enfeksiyonundan korunmada maruziyet sonrası profilaksinin yeri. TSK Koruyucu Hekimlik Bülteni, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 6, 655–664. https://ajindex.com/articles/131304

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Bateman C. Health carers cracking under HIV/AIDS workload. S Afr Med J. 2003; 93(10): 734–6
  2. Elliot R, Jurgens R. Rapid HIV screening at the point of care: legal and ethical questions. Montreal. Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, 2000
  3. Laboratory Centre for Disease Control. Proceedings of the consensus conference on infected health care workers: risk for transmission of bloodborne pathogens. Can Commun Dis Rep. 1998; 24(Suppl 4)
  4. Kiertiburanakul S, Wannaying B, Tonsuttakul S, Kehachindawat P, Apivanich S, Somsakul S, at al. Use of HIV Postexposure Prophylaxis in healthcare workers after occupational exposure: a Thai university hospital setting. J Med Assoc Thai. 2006; 89(7): 974–8
  5. Kowalska JD, Firlag–Burkacka E, Niezabitowska M, Bakowska E, Ignatowska A, Pulik P, at al. Post–exposure prophylaxis of HIV infection in out–patient clinic of hospital for infectious diseases in Warsaw in 2001–2002. Przegl Epidemiol. 2006; 60(4): 789–94
  6. Ann ND, Ciesielski CA, Metler RP, Hammet TA, Li J, Fleming PA. Occupationally acquired human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection: national case surveillance data during 20 years of the HIV epidemic in the United States. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2003; 24: 86–96
  7. Bell DM. Occupational risk of human immunodeficiency virus infection in healthcare workers: an overview. Am J Med. 1997; 102(suppl 5B): 9–15
  8. Ippolito G, Puro V, De Carli G, Italian Study Group on Occupational Risk of HIV Infection. The risk of occupational human immunodeficiency virus in health care workers. Arch Int Med. 1993; 153: 1451–8
  9. CDC. Update: human immunodeficiency virus infections in health–care workers exposed to blood of infected patients. MMWR. 1987; 36: 285–9 10. Fahey BJ, Koziol DE, Banks SM, Henderson DK. Frequency of nonparenteral occupational exposures to blood and body fluids before and after universal precautions training. Am J Med. 1991; 90: 145–53 11. Henderson DK, Fahey BJ, Willy M, et al. Risk for occupational transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV–1) associated with clinical exposures: a prospective evaluation. Ann Intern Med. 1990; 113: 740–6
  10. Cardo DM, Culver DH, Ciesielski CA, et al. A case–control study of HIV seroconversion in health care workers after percutaneous exposure. N Engl J Med. 1997; 337: 1485–90
  11. Mast ST, Woolwine JD, Gerberding JL. Efficacy of gloves in reducing blood volumes transferred during simulated needlestick injury. J Infect Dis. 1993; 168: 1589–92
  12. Pinto