Are we doing enough to control infection risk in Australian small animal veterinary practice? Findings from a mixed methods study

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
File version

Version of Record (VoR)

Author(s)
Willemsen, Angela
Cobbold, Rowland
Gibson, Justine
Wilks, Kathryn
Reid, Simon
Griffith University Author(s)
Primary Supervisor
Other Supervisors
Editor(s)
Date
2024
Size
File type(s)
Location
Abstract

Background: Managing risk effectively within small animal veterinary practice is integral for staff, patient and client safety. Veterinary personnel are exposed to many risks, including bites, scratches, sharps injuries and exposure to zoonotic diseases and multi-resistant organisms. Patients may also be exposed to healthcare-associated infections, including multi-resistant organisms. While veterinary owners/managers have a duty of care under legislated Workplace Health and Safety requirements, all staff have a responsibility to contribute to assessing and minimizing risk. The application of standard and transmission precautions will help with risk minimization. This study aimed to determine how small animal veterinary staff understand and perceive infection prevention and control risk and to provide recommendations to assist with risk mitigation.

Methods: A mixed methods design was used. A digital questionnaire was administered to small animal veterinary staff in Australia to identify knowledge, attitudes and practices of risk related behaviors. Follow up focus groups were conducted with small animal practitioners to explore factors supporting and preventing veterinary staff from implementing recommended practices identified in the questionnaire.

Results: Small animal veterinary staff acknowledged they participated in many high-risk activities, including recapping needles and eating and drinking in patient care areas. Injuries were common, with 77% of staff receiving a bite or scratch, and 22% receiving a sharps injury in the preceding six months. Less than one in five of these incidents was reported. Staff agreed effective infection prevention and control was the responsibility of all staff, but a designated staff member should take responsibility for managing it. The practice owner/manager was integral to supporting and promoting recommended strategies, contributing to a positive workplace culture and improving safety for staff and patients.

Conclusion: Small animal veterinary staff have some understanding of how to identify, report, manage and mitigate risk but were limited by their knowledge of infection prevention and control principles.

Journal Title

Frontiers in Public Health

Conference Title
Book Title
Edition
Volume

12

Issue
Thesis Type
Degree Program
School
Publisher link
Patent number
Funder(s)
Grant identifier(s)
Rights Statement
Rights Statement

© 2024 Willemsen, Cobbold, Gibson, Wilks and Reid. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

Item Access Status
Note
Access the data
Related item(s)
Subject
Persistent link to this record
Citation

Willemsen, A; Cobbold, R; Gibson, J; Wilks, K; Reid, S, Are we doing enough to control infection risk in Australian small animal veterinary practice? Findings from a mixed methods study, Frontiers in Public Health, 2024, 12, pp. 1388107

Collections