Is the Edmonton HCV/HIV Scenario Setting Us Back Decades?
- File Under Transmission clinical setting
As noted yesterday on the blog in Edmonton a healthcare worker tested positive for HIV and HCV, because this infected worker was present during the neuro-surgical procedures patients were contacted for testing. Due to privacy issues the worker's role in the operating room wasn't specified. Officials have said and I quote
"The expert panel determined the risk here was very, very low, if not zero, because there were no breaches of infection-control practices identified with any of these particular patients,"
I have deep empathy for the patients who fear the possibility of contracting HIV or HCV after undergoing surgery at the facility. These patients may not fully realize how low the risk is for transmitting bloodborne pathogens from infected worker to patient. As mentioned on the blog yesterday unless the healthcare worker had deliberately put patients at risk, (which is not the case) the risk is extremely low.
Today in the media we learned that the health minister has asked for a review into the testing of health workers for bloodborne illnesses.
In retrospect this could be comparable in some ways to the AIDS hysteria seen in the 1980's . A time when the transmission of AIDS was erroneously fueled in the media. First, the HCP must be viremic (i.e., have infectious virus circulating in the bloodstream).
Second, the HCP must be injured or have a condition (e.g. weeping dermatitis) that allows direct exposure to his/her blood or other infectious body fluids.
Third, the HCP’s blood or infectious body fluid must gain direct access to a patient’s wound, traumatized tissue, mucous membranes, or similar portal of entry.
This incident has raised the question of whether regular testing of health care workers for infectious diseases should be carried out for ensuring patient safety.According to Health Minister Gene Zwozdesky, the position needs to be strengthened, as it is mandatory to get health workers in Alberta tested for blood-borne illnesses. If, a worker does test positive, they have to notify regulatory bodies.Heather Smith, President of United Nurses of Alberta does not believe mandatory testing is needed, but does say it is important to continue using universal precautions."Liberal Leader David Swann agrees, as it would involve a huge economic investment, including the medical legal issues that would crop up.
I comprehend and recognize the documented rare isolated cases of the transmission of bloodborne pathogen's from healthcare worker to patient. Which only underscores the importance for the use of universal precautions, as Heather Smith pointed out in the article. What I don't understand is that in 2011 Mr. Gene Zwozdesky, the Health Minister, calling for mandatory testing in a country which last time I checked practiced sophisticated medicine. In my humble non medical opinion Mr. Zwozdesky is stepping back into a time where no medically educated or otherwise man/woman should go. By doing so he is negatively, and irresponsibly confirming the Edmonton's patients deep routed fear for contracting HIV or HCV in the mentioned setting, when he should be placing emphasis on the research/facts from Scientists and medical authorities who have established the risk is low. I can only assume the Minister was misquoted, because I can not grasp his solution and hope it will hold little merit with the officials in his country.

0 comments: