艾滋病病毒职业暴露的防护与思考

目的 旨在明确医务人员艾滋病病毒职业暴露的含义，并提出医务人员艾滋病病毒职业暴露的预防对策。方法 根据实际工作所采取的措施和相关知识，提出医务人员艾滋病病毒职业暴露的防护对策。结果 防护对策是各级管理人员重视、关心医务人员的职业防护，建立完善的规章制度；工作中遵循标准预防原则；加强临床医务人员艾滋病及职业暴露的相关知识的全员培训；执行普遍预防措施（UP），把UP当作工作常规；发生HIV职业暴露作好伤口处理、登记并报当地疾控部门；暴露发生后即时及第4周、第8周、第12周及6个月对HIV抗体进行检测及随访。结论 当前医护人员的艾滋病防护知识不足，必须加紧培训；争取立法把艾滋病病毒职业暴露纳入工伤范畴，以解除医务人员的后顾之忧。     

艾滋病病毒职业暴露的防护与思考

艾滋病(获得性免疫缺陷综合征即AIDS)是一种病死率极高的严重传染性疾病,目前还没有治愈的方法,也没有有效的疫苗可以预防。艾滋病病毒(HIV)对医务人员职业性感染的危险性是很低的,但一旦被HIV感染后,不仅对医务人员本人及家人的身心健康造成威胁,给医务人员造成极大的心理压力     

基层医务人员艾滋病职业暴露防护现状调查与对策分析

对我院的228名医务人员进行"医务人员艾滋病职业暴露的认知及防护现状调查"的问卷调查,对调查的结果进行整理、分析。结果医务人员对艾滋病的三条基本传播途径知晓率较高,而对几种不常见和非传播途径的知晓率较低;广大医务人员对艾滋病职业暴露概念、预防及暴露后处理相关知识知晓率比较低;医务人员在诊断治疗活动中的防护行为不理想。基层医务人员艾滋病职业暴露防护现状较差,应该加强基础知识学习,提高防护意识,在工作中积极正确的做好防护。     

艾滋病病毒职业暴露的原因与防护措施

艾滋病是由人类免疫缺陷病毒引起的全身性疾病,是一种新发现的主要经性接触和血液传播的病毒性传染病,至今为止尚无特效的治疗方法,所以患者几乎无一例外地走向死亡。     

医护人员艾滋病职业暴露的自我防护体会

作者阐述医务人员艾滋病职业暴露的危险性及防范措施,强调职业暴露重在预防。指出职业暴露后的应急措施:①伤口的正确处理;②抗病毒药物的使用;③职业暴露者HIV状况的监测;④职业暴露后的心理支持。     

医务人员艾滋病职业暴露与防护

1．职业暴露 维护医务人员的职业安全，有效预防医务人员在临床工作中职业暴露而发生艾滋病病毒感染是目前国内外医学领域函待研究的课题。     

医务人员对艾滋病职业暴露的防护措施

艾滋病职业暴露是指医务人员从事诊疗、护理等工作过程中意外被艾滋病病毒感染者或者艾滋病病人的血液、体液污染了皮肤或者粘膜,或者被含有艾滋病病毒的血液、体液污染了针头及其他锐器刺破皮肤,有可能被艾滋病病毒感染的情况.为维护医务人员的职业安全,有效预防医务人员在工作中发生职业暴露感染艾滋病病毒,应加强医务人员预防与控制艾滋病病毒感染的防护措施.     

社区医院护理人员HIV职业暴露防护知识调查分析

目的:了解社区医院护理人员对HIV职业暴露的知识、态度、信念以及行为,为主管部门制定政策提供参考。方法:采取整体抽样,以自制调查表对区内11家社区医院的131名护理人员进行调查。结果:31.3%的人通过专业培训获取HIV/AIDS职业暴露知识;31～40岁之间护理人员知晓率显著高于其他年龄段护理人员(χ~2=10.061,P <0.05);大学以上学历护理人员对AIDS职业暴露防护知识的知晓率显著高于中专和大专学历护理人员(χ~2=8.200,P <0.05);主管护师对AIDS职业暴露知识知晓率显著高于护士和护师(χ~2=7.951,P <0.05);8.4%的护理人员表示不愿护理HIV感染者。结论:社区医院护理人员面临的HIV职业暴露风险较大,对相关防护知识的掌握仍有欠缺,部分护理人员在对待HIV职业暴露的态度以及其行为均存在不妥之处,建立医务人员HIV职业暴露风险保障体系,为医务工作者人身安全提供保障已十分迫切。     

院前急救护士HIV职业暴露防护现状及对策

总结了本院31名院前急救护士对HIV职业暴露危险因素的防护现状,并提出相关防护对策。主要包括加强职业安全防护,增强自我防护意识,提高急救人员素质,规范护理操作行为,做好锐器伤防护,艾滋病职业暴露后有效处理,缓解工作、社会性心理压力。认为加强对院前急救护士HIV职业暴露防护知识及技能的培训,提高护士职业防护水平,能有效减少艾滋病职业暴露的发生。     

HIV postexposure prophylaxis for children and adolescents

HIV postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) is now a well-established part of the management of health care workers after occupational exposures to HIV. Use of PEP for adults exposed to HIV after sexual contact or injection drug use in nonoccupational settings remains controversial with limited data available. There is even less information available concerning HIV PEP for children and adolescents after accidental needlestick injuries or sexual assault. The objective was to describe the current practice of and associated problems with HIV PEP for children and adolescents at an urban academic pediatric emergency department. A retrospective review of all children and adolescents offered HIV PEP between June 1997-June 1998 was conducted. Ten pediatric and adolescent patients were offered HIV PEP, six patients after sexual assault, four patients after needle stick injuries. There were two small children 2 and 3 years of age and eight adolescents. Of these 10 patients, eight were started on HIV PEP. The regimens used for PEP varied; zidovudine, lamivudine, and indinavir were prescribed for in seven patients and zidovudine, lamivudine, and nelfinavir for one other. All 10 patients were HIV negative by serology at baseline testing and all available for follow-up testing (5 of 10) remained HIV negative at 4 to 28 weeks. Only two patients completed the full course of 4 weeks of antiretroviral therapy. Financial concerns, side effects, additional psychiatric and substance abuse issues as well as the degree of parental involvement influenced whether PEP and clinical follow-up was completed. HIV PEP in the nonoccupational setting for children and adolescents presents a medical and management challenge, and requires a coordinated effort at the initial presentation to the health care system and at follow-up. The difficulties encountered in the patients in our series need to be considered before initiating prophylaxis. A provisional management approach to HIV PEP in children and adolescents is proposed.     

HIV postexposure prophylaxis after sexual assault

Recent advances in the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) disease have prompted health care providers to reexamine recommendations for prophylaxis of HIV infection. Parallels with occupational exposure through mucous membrane tissues spur consideration of HIV prophylaxis after sexual assault for several reasons. In both instances, exposure occurs at a single point in time and is unlikely to recur. Although the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention does not make definitive recommendations regarding postexposure prophylaxis after sexual assault, the reality is that as clinicians, we face situations in which we must consider treatment for prevention of HIV disease after sexual assault. Guidelines for treatment and how to create and implement a policy to ensure the best outcomes, and provide a high quality of patient care with the New York State guidelines as a model, are discussed.     

HIV postexposure prophylaxis practices by US ED practitioners

To determine how often US ED practitioners have prescribed HIV post-exposure prophylaxis (HIV PEP) and to discern how willing they are to offer it to patients, the authors surveyed 600 ED practitioners attending a national conference. According to their self-report, 11% had taken HIV PEP themselves. Sixty-eight percent had prescribed HIV PEP at some time. Of these, 92% had treated needlestick-injured health care workers, 48% sexual assault survivors, and 49% nonhealth care needlestick-injured persons. ED practitioners were more willing to offer HIV PEP after exposures to HIV-infected or high-risk sources than unknown or low- risk sources, as well as after sexual assault than consensual sex. Female practitioners, those who had themselves taken HIV PEP, resident physicians, and ED practitioners with fewer than 6 years of clinical practice were generally more apt to offer HIV PEP. Educational campaigns appear to be necessary to help ED practitioners determine when HIV PEP is appropriate.