There is actually a greater incentive to hospitals than inviting OSHA in and that is the JCAHO accreditation that requires compliance with both patient care and employee protection requirements. I would first take this to the hospital group that manages the JCAHO program and indicate that failure to comply with the "standard of care" for patients and employees creates a risk to the personnel involved as well as to the employees. Also, your risk manager should be able to support this program as a preventive control on worker's compensation. Aside from the obvious issue of protecting employees, often making a business case for a change in procedure can be more effective. Lawrence M. Gibbs, CIH Associate Vice Provost Environmental Health and Safety EH&S - 480 Oak Road Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305-8007 Ph: 650/723-7403 Fax: 650/725-3468 e-mail: LGibbs**At_Symbol_Here**stanford.edu EH&S Web Site http://www.stanford.edu/dept/EHS/prod/ At 07:43 AM 9/9/2004, Gordon Miller wrote: >There's a good historical precedent, X-rays/CAT scans. The operators >protect themselves because there is risk to the procedure but they >get no benefit at all (besides pay and a dosimeter) and because the >more exposures they get compared to patients means they have much >greater risk. > >At least you're in the same room as the patient. I've only had one >x-ray where the operator staid with me while wearing a flexible lead >apron (a GI series - ugh!). > > >>I'm having a similar problem, but in a different industry. I have >>moved into healthcare, specifically in an Oncology Clinic and >>Infusion center. We have a number of new NIOSH recommendations and >>OSHA standards coming regarding chemotherapy. (I don't know how >>familiar you are with chemo and all the new monoclonal antibodies, >>etc that are coming out, but I'd take a sulfuric acid splash over a >>large taxane exposure anyday.) We need to implement a lot of new PPE >>aside from the gloves the nurses have always worn, and you wouldn't >>believe the complaints! They have now convinced the clinic manager >>and the VP over our clinic that it will be detrimental to patient >>care because we're going to scare them if the nurses come at them >>dressed in the full required PPE. I admit that I would probably be >>a little scared too if someone came at me dressed head to toe in a >>gown, gloves and goggles and told me it was to protect themselves >>from the stuff they were going to put in my body! However we can >>address the issue with some education. We are required now to tell >>patients and their families that their urine, BM, and any other body >>secretions are toxic for at least 48hrs after treatment, and the >>nurses are refusing to tell them that also because they "don't want >>to scare them more than they already are over being diagnosed with >>cancer". I'm about ready to "invite" OSHA over for a visit and see >>how quickly they all change their minds on this little PPE issue. >> >>Amy L. Bullis >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Chris Wysong >> To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU >> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 9:21 AM >> Subject: [DCHAS-L] Fw: [DCHAS-L] Safety Rules >> >> >> "Help", >> >> I am a new safety in my college of science and am running into >>problems with the dean. He does not want to follow standard >>laboratory practices regarding clothing (short tops, long pants, >>shoes) because it might scare someone. His logic behind the pants >>is they could trap corrosives and cause more damage than if the >>student was wearing shorts. Does anyone have any suggestions on how >>to deal with this issue or knows about an injury resulting from >>wearing pants as opposed to shorts? >> >> I am trying to convince him, using the ACS guide to laboratory >>safety but to no avail. If anyone could offer suggestions it would >>be appreciated. >> >> Thanks >> Chris Wysong > >
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post