Archive for month: October, 2018

9/11 Bombing

Introduction

One of the greatest terror attack to have every being carried out on the U.S soil was 9/11 attack. It left many people dead and injured. The occurrence of the attack is largely blamed on weakness in the U.S intelligence processes, particularly in the area of data analysis. According to Cooper “a wide range of problems has contributed to the unease currently pervading the Intelligence Community; a significant number of the most serious result from shortcomings in intelligence analysis rather than from defects in collection, organization, or management (Cooper, 2005).” From the observation made by cooper it is evident that 9/11 attack occurred due to intelligence community failure to provide accurate and actionable intelligence to the law enforcement agencies that would have helped in preventing the attack. The outcome of failures in the intelligence process resulted in many lives being lost, injuries to the victims both emotional and physical following the attack. For purposes of understanding how the intelligence failure contributed to the 9/11 attack, it is important to look at the various pathologies associated with the U.S intelligence process and determine how they contributed to the attack. Therefore, the main objective of this paper is to analyze pathologies associated with normal intelligence process, the focus being analytical pathologies to determine how they contributed to intelligence failure through polluting it, resulting to the most devastating attack on the U.S soil.

 

 

Pathologies and their Outcomes

There are various pathologies associated with normal intelligence process that polluted accurate collection, analysis and dissemination of intelligence that would have helped in preventing the 9/11 attack. Inefficiency in the intelligence community account structure contributed to the occurrence of the 9/11 attack as it polluted the intelligence process in areas of data collection, production and analysis. According to Cooper (2005) the intelligence community account system, naturally creates individual and institutional ownership of critical intelligence domains. The account system provides benefit of ensuring that there is accountability within the intelligence community in the U.S. However, individual ownership of certain intelligence processes makes it difficult for sharing, collaboration and cooperation among different security agencies. Therefore, before the 9/11 attack, the American intelligence community did not have strong accountability structure in place, whereby, responsibility for sharing, producing and collecting intelligence could be placed on a certain individual agency. As a result, the Central Intelligence Association and FBI did not have clear responsibilities and accountabilities to make concerning how intelligence is collected and shared with the right authorizes for purposes of preventing any form of terror attack.

In addition, the accountability weakness did arise mainly due to failure of the intelligence community to have a central institution that would manage the intelligence process among all security agencies in the U.S. This created a loophole that made it difficult to produce timely and accurate data that would be shared with the right authorities on time with an objective of preventing any form of attack (Cooper, 2005). The weakness contributed to failures in intelligence sharing, cooperation and collaboration among the various security agencies and this resulted in the 9/11 attack. The attack could have been prevented, if, there U.S intelligence community had a strong account system. This would have ensured that there were individual agencies that would be held responsible for issues to do with data collection, information sharing and timely action on the provided intelligence of impending attack.

According to Stanier (2013), when there are poor accountability structures within the intelligence system of a nation, it becomes difficult for individual agencies to undertake their specific roles effectively. Thus, lack of strong account structure resulted in limitations within the intelligence process, particular in the area of data analysis and sharing prior to the 9/11 attack. The intelligence community had information that there was impending attack, but failed to share with other security agencies accurate and actionable intelligence of the target areas of the attack. This situation made it difficult for the law enforcement within U.S, especially in the city of New York to prevent the terror attack as they had no specific information where the attack was going to happen. This clearly shows that weaknesses within the intelligence community account structures creates loopholes in the intelligence process that make it hard to prevent various form of terror attacks as it was the case with 9/11 attack in the U.S soil.

The second pathology is related to the intelligence community reliance on evidence based scientism as basis of analysis data collected from the field concerning security issues and threats (Cooper, 2005). There U.S intelligence community has a cultural orientation that requires data analysts to base their decisions and judgment on scientifically proven methods (Pythian, 2013). This means that the intelligence analysts cannot make any recommendations about any possible data received from the field without having to prove it scientifically.

For that reason, it becomes difficult for the analysts to make anticipatory recommendations based on certain intelligence that cannot be at first be proven scientifically. The issue of evidence based scientism, in a big way resulted in the 9/11 attack, as it made it difficult for the intelligence community to recommend for security actions on an impending attack without any scientific evidence to support their claims. For example, the intelligence community had rumors of an impending terror attack, but due to cultural orientation requiring evidence to be provided before coming into a conclusion of sharing the information with appropriate agencies, the information was just treated as a rumor.

Therefore, it was difficult for the intelligence analysts to make use of the rumors as basis of providing anticipatory intelligence of impending attack as it was difficult for their recommendations to be taken seriously by the senior people within security agencies without proper evidence of when and where the attack would take place. Pythian (2013) indicates that intelligence process that allow for anticipation to be made by analysts of possible attack using minor data, does not any supporting evidence can be instrumental in preventing key attacks in the modern era of terrorism.

Hence, the U.S intelligence process failed during the 9/11 attack due to overreliance on evidence based science as basis of making appropriate recommendation to security agencies for appropriate actions to be taken in preventing a particular threat, resulting in many lives and properties being lost in the process (Cooper, 2005).  The cultural orientation within the U.S intelligence community of relying always on scientific evidence as basis of allowing analysts to make judgments and decisions regarding certain data from a source contributed to the unintended 9/11 attack. The attack could have been prevented as there were unscientific intelligence of an impending attack, and this would have been used by analyst in making recommendations that would have helped in putting in place measures aimed at ending preventing the 9/11 bombings.

Additionally, the tyrant associated with current intelligence also contributed to the intelligence process failure to anticipate accurately a possible terror attack on the U.S soil (Cooper, 2005). The intelligence community following the collapse of the cold war has ignored the need of having long-term oriented intelligence, but only focuses on collection of immediate and actionable intelligence by seniors within national security agencies and institutions. This weakness was evident in the way intelligence community was collecting intelligence before the 9/11 attack. The intelligence agencies did not have any future oriented information that anticipated of a possible terror attack in the U.S soil.

As a result, the intelligence community was caught off-guard during the 9/11 attack. Betts (2009) indicates that failure of the intelligence agencies to be future as well as current oriented during intelligence collection is a major loophole when trying to prevent threats to national security. Thus, there was intelligence gap as far as possible future national threat was concerned and this result in the unintended 9/11 bombings within the city of New York, which caught the intelligence community off-guard.

However, if future oriented approach was in place in intelligence collection, production and analysis; the U.S intelligence system would have helped in capturing some data concerning Al-Qaida as a major future security threat and anticipate a possible attack sponsored by the group, therefore, making recommendations of security boost in all entry points in the U.S before the attack took place.

Furthermore, the overemphasis of the intelligence production in a great way contributed to 9/11 attack. Cooper notes that “the entire intelligence system is dominated by the demands of processing huge amounts of information gathered by collection systems whose architecture was largely designed during the Cold War to address a very different problem. This huge inflow created a production-oriented model and an “efficiency paradigm” better suited to the “Industrial Age” than to the Information Age of the Twenty-first century. The volume of collected intelligence is so vast that, even with automated assistance, human analysts can effectively review and evaluate only a small part of the flow (Cooper, 2005).” This quote from Cooper’s work shows that the U.S intelligence system has focused mainly on production of intelligence leading to huge inflow of data that are difficult to accurately and timely analyze using the existing systems.

Peppler (2008) argues that the quality of data produced is essential in helping to prevent terror attacks, rather than quantity. Accordingly, the major weakness of the U.S intelligence process that made the 9/11 bombings to occur was overlying on production of intelligence. Consequently, the intelligence community had a lot of data to analyze from the field, making it difficult to accurately come up with actionable intelligence that would have aided in prevention of the 9/11 bombings.

Accordingly, the overemphasis on intelligence production resulted into poor quality intelligence being produced by the CIA and other agencies that did not specify the period of the attack, region to be attacked, making it difficult for security agencies to act on shared intelligence. This indicates that quality should be the most critical component of intelligence production, but not quantity, if the intelligence system in the U.S will manage to prevent unintended terror outcomes as it was the case with 9/11 attacks.

Also, the over-reliance on past judgments within the intelligence process polluted the capability of the U.S intelligence community of collecting accurate data that would have helped in preventing the 9/11 attack. According to Cooper (2005) past judgments are used as basis of ensuring there is consistency in the way decisions and judgments are made by the intelligence community when dealing with intelligence acquired from different sources. However, the biggest weakness of this approach in intelligence analysis is that it limits the analysts capabilities of thinking beyond previous judgments based on existence of new information.

Thus, lack of flexibility in judgment and decision making processes impaired the capability of the intelligence analysts before the 9/11 attack to make accurate judgments based on prevailing intelligence that would have helped in prevention of the attack from occurring. In the modern age, where security threats keeps on changing, there is need for the intelligence community to allow for flexibility in judgment making, especially on the part of the intelligence analysts (Betts, 2009).

Relying on the same methods of making judgment when faced with new security and peace threats can be counterproductive in efforts of preventing attacks on the U.S citizens. The intelligence community ignored this fact prior to the 9/11 attack and used the same judgment methods, ignoring emergency of new threats that required alternative judgments for them to be effectively dealt with, particularly on analysis steps of the intelligence process. The result of this pathology was generation of ineffective intelligence that could not help detect and prevent the 9/11 bombings on time.

On the other hand, the pathology of failing to conduct adequate research contributed to the 9/11 attack, as it polluted the intelligence process ability to produce credible, reliable and accurate intelligence. Cooper notes that “this emphasis on current intelligence, with its consequent time pressures and the methods needed to meet production demands, has produced a range of distorting effects that are not fully recognized (Cooper, 2005).” Therefore, the need for current intelligence has created some systematic problems resulting to neglect of adequate research as basis of informing the intelligence community data analysis approaches and judgment techniques. Hence, the intelligence processes in the U.S continue relying in outdated methods in area of judgment and data analysis ignoring emerging issues resulting in inaccurate and unreliable intelligence being produced. One of the disadvantages of emphasis on current intelligence is that it usually undermines the capacity of analysts to carry out in-depth studies by making sure, the majority of the efforts are directed towards completion of short-term tasks.

Second, the high demand for current intelligence has denied analysts an opportunity of working under the mentorship of senior individuals within the intelligence community, as part of training as well as professional growth; thereby lacking an opportunity of enhancing their skills to conduct in-depth research as basis of producing intelligence reports (Phythian, 2013).

Third, the current intelligence concept creates reward systems that make analysts biased toward conducting deeper analysis of available data, for purposes of carrying out short-term tasks as they are better rewarding. The situation of failing to conduct adequate research resulted into the intelligence community lacking information of the growth of a terror group that was increasingly becoming a threat to national security by planning to carry out one of the deadliest terror attack on the U.S soil (Cooper, 2005). If, intelligence processes within the U.S emphasized on the need of deeper research, it would have been possible to make accurate intelligence estimate of impending attack; thereby making appropriate efforts to prevent it.

However, the situation of demanding current intelligence, denied the analysts the opportunity of carrying out in-depth research to the available data concerning al-Qaida as the basis of determining its threat to U.S national security as well as stability. This contributed to a greater extent to the intelligence services agencies being caught off-guard by the 9/11 bombing. The deaths, injuries and losses of property experienced could have been prevented had the intelligence community put emphasis on research as basis of informing analyst decisions and judgments related to various intelligence data provided from the field (Betts, 2009).

Moreover, the neglect of the intelligence community in the area of anticipatory intelligence is a major pathology that contributed to the unintended occurrence of 9/11 bombings. Most of the intelligence communities make use of their resources of producing customer-relevant intelligence. Nonetheless, Cooper notes that “but the community must go beyond the current interest areas of its customers if it is to perform its primary national function of preventing surprise (Cooper, 2005).”  This indicates that the intelligence community should diversify the use of resources by also focusing on future oriented intelligence. The future oriented intelligence help in gathering of data on possible future threats to national security and putting in place measures of ensuring the threat is adequately addressed before its occurs (Phythian, 2013).

The pathology of failing to pay attention to anticipatory intelligence prior to the 9/11 bombings was the major reason the intelligence process was polluted to an extent of failing to note of an impending attack and share the information on time with the appropriate law enforcement agencies. The 9/11 attack could have been anticipated, if the intelligence processes in the U.S was focusing on future related intelligence rather that customer relevant information. It would have been possible to prevent the attacks on time, as future oriented data analysis would have helped in understanding that Al-Qaida was continually becoming a threat to national security; hence, ensuring the U.S government took the right measures to dismantle the organization before it carried a surprise attack, as it was the case with 9/112 attack on the U.S soil.

Finally, the failure of the intelligence community to invest in analytical tools for purposes of information validation contributed to the occurrence of 9/11 bombings. The intelligence community puts emphasis on secrecy ignoring the need of ensuring the collected data is something that can be validated for accuracy and reliability purposes before being put into use by the appropriate authorities.  According to Cooper, “unfortunately, the more evidence and judgments are restricted in dissemination by compartmentation and distribution limitations, the more likely it is that questionable judgments will pass unchallenged (Cooper 2005).”

As a consequence, the intelligence community ends up producing information that has errors, and is difficult to determine its validation as there are not tools and systems in place to determine its validity. This scenario played during the 9/11 attack, whereby, the intelligence process, especially development of intelligence estimates inaccurately developed wrong information that was difficult to validate, leading to the attack on the U.S soil.

Conclusion

This analysis of the various pathologies within the intelligence process indicates that they contributed to unintended outcomes, such as 9/11 bombings by creating loopholes in intelligence production and analysis. Some of the major pathologies discussed in the research include over-reliance on intelligence production, lack of appropriate analytical tool for purposes of intelligence validation, ignoring research, use of previous judgments in all situations (Cooper, 2005). The pathologies creates a situation where the intelligence processes do not produce timely and accurate information that can be used in dealing with emerging terror threats. The pathologies for instance, made it difficult for the U.S intelligence community to gather data that would have helped in prevention of the 9/11 attack. The community was caught-off guard due to some of the weaknesses within intelligence collection, analysis and sharing.

The impact of the intelligence process pathologies and how they created the unintended outcomes of the 9/11 bombings should be major lessons on how future intelligence should be dealt with for purposes of enhancing its capability in preventing possible attacks on the U.S citizens in any part of the world. The emphasis of the intelligence community should be to address limitations on its current intelligence processes, such as production and analysis aspects with an objective of producing accurate and timely intelligence that can help deal with national security threats in the most effective manner (Peppler, 2008). This can only be attained by making huge changes within the intelligence processes employed by the U.S, for purposes of enhancing data analysis process, sharing, cooperation and collaboration among all security arms. In conclusion, the future of the U.S to prevent terror attacks is dependent on making appropriate improvements in some of the noted pathologies in its intelligence processes.

References

Betts, R. K. (2009). Enemies of intelligence: Knowledge and power in American national security. Columbia University Press.

Cooper, J. R. (2005). Curing analytic pathologies: Pathways to improved intelligence analysis. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY WASHINGTON DC CENTER FOR STUDY OF INTELLIGENCE.

Peppler, B. (2008). Intelligence pathologies in terrorism analysis. Journal of the Australian Institute of Professional Intelligence Officers, 16(3), 41.

Phythian, M. (2013). Understanding the intelligence cycle. Routledge.

Stanier, I. P. (2013). Contemporary organisational pathologies in police information sharing: new contributions to Sheptycki’s lexicon of intelligence in policing (Doctoral dissertation, London Metropolitan University).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Needlestick Injuries in Healthcare Settings and the Rule of Infection Control

Name

Institution

Date

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Needlestick Injuries in Healthcare Settings and the Rule of Infection Control

Issue or Problem

The cases of needlestick injuries within Canadian healthcare sector, especially in the region of Ontario have been high. Higginson and Parry (2013) indicates that healthcare professionals who make use or get exposed to different types of needles are usually at high risk of getting needlestick injuries. The injuries exposes the victims to threat of various types of dangerous inflection, associated with bloodborne pathogens, for instance, hepatitis C virus, hepatitis B virus, HIV (Human immunodeficiency virus) (Higginson and Parry, 2013).        According to Chambers, Mustard and Etches (2015) various jurisdictions around the world have developed regulations with an aim of healthcare workers adopting safety-engineered needles with an objective of preventing cases of needlestick related injuries. Chambers, Mustard and Etches (2015) argue that in 2005 before Canadian region of Ontario adopted the use of needle safety regulations, a survey carried out nationally among nurses and other care professions that almost half of the nurses were injured by needles as well as other sharp objects in the course of offering patients with nursing care, especially offering medication injections. The high cases of healthcare professionals reporting needlestic related injuries in Canada clearly shows that the risk of getting inflections associated with this type of injuries is high among the care professionally, particularly nurses.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the prevalence of the cases of needlestick injuries within the Canadian healthcare setting, especially the major causes of the needlestick injuries among the healthcare workers, such as nurses and physicians. The paper will also looks at the possible measures that can be put in place as way of controlling needlestick injuries in a healthcare setting in Canada.

Methods or Interventions

For purposes of completing this research, data was collected by reviewing literature that exists on needlestic injuries among healthcare professionals, using peer reviewed journals. The use of peer reviewed journals helped in collecting accurate and reliable data on the concept of needlestic injuries, especially on the issues that causes the injuries, the rate of prevalence among the healthcare professionals, particularly in Canada and ways in which the number of injuries arising from needlestick injuries can be reduced in the future. The data collection process started by first defining the topic of the study, especially the specific focus of the study, which in this case was needlestick injuries and rule of controlling it, the two words were used as the key search terms that is needlestick injuries and ways of controlling needlestick injuries. The use of this technique helped in search of data from different databases, which was directly related to the subject of the study.

The issue of needlestick injuries is very significant in understanding it as it poses a huge occupation hazard among the healthcare professionals. For example, Higginson and Parry (2013) indicates that the injuries exposes the victims to threat of various types of dangerous inflection, associated with bloodborne pathogens, for instance, hepatitis C virus, hepatitis B virus, HIV. Also,  nurses have reporting at one point in their career within Canada having being exposed to needlestick injuries, an indication that it is major threat to the safety of healthcare workers in Canada and other parts of the world (Chambers, Mustard and Etches, 2015).

In Canada, particularly the Ontario region, from 2011 the government implemented a regulation encouraging the use of safety-engineered needles among the healthcare professionals. However, the major gaps in the implementation of this regulation is lack of adequate information on what mainly causes needlestick injuries and the best alternative control measures, rather than just regulations.

Findings or Results

Prevalence of the problem: In understanding the needlestick injuries, one of the major areas of focus of the literature review was to determine the prevalence of the problem among the healthcare workers in Canada and different parts of the world. In a study carried out by Chambers, Mustard and Etches (2015) it revealed that almost half of the nurses working in the healthcare sector in 2005 reported having encountered injuries related to needlestick injuries as well as other sharp objects in the course of their work. Also, Kevitt and Hayes (2014) in a study revealed that despite a number of safety measures being implemented in relations to reducing the number of needlestick injuries in medical teaching school for a period of ten years, the cases of injuries among the healthcare workers in the school have not reduced. The study by Kevitt and Hayes is an indication that the current safety measures being used still remains ineffective in reducing the occupational hazard of needlestick injuries among the healthcare workers. The infectiveness of the methods of safety being used in hospitals currently in different parts of the world, particularly Canada raises major issues of concerns, as it shows that most of the healthcare workers, especially those who comes into constant exposure with sharp objects and needles are usually at high risk of getting infections associated with needlstick injuries (Riddell, Kennedy and Tong, 2015).

Also, Chambers, Mustard and Etches (2015) revealed that exposure to needlestick injuries exposes healthcare professionals to different types of dangers, such as getting infected with HIV virus, hepatitis viruses, putting their health at risk. For example, Wicker et al (2014) indicates that infections associated with needlestick injuries in the past have resulted in the death of healthcare professionals. The death of workers in the healthcare setting due to needlestick injuries shows that this is a serious problem that needs appropriate measures to be put in place with an objective of addressing its hazards in the future, especially increasing the safety of healthcare workers within the Canadian region and different parts of the world.

            Causes of needlestick injuries: A number of studies have been carried out in the past with an objective of determining the major causes of needlestick injuries among the healthcare workers. The table below summarizes some of the major causes of injuries associated with needlestick;

Causes of Needlestick injuries	Risk of occurrence
Tiredness among the healthcare workers	High
Failure to adhere to safety guidelines	Moderate
Injury from a third party	Most likely
Injury causes by patient movement	High
Failure of safety measures working effectively	Moderate
Stress	High

Table 1: showing the causes of needlestick injuries among healthcare workers

The above table indicates that there are multiple factors that put at risk the healthcare workers to the hazard of needlestick injuries. Table one indicates that tiredness among the healthcare workers is a major factor that puts them at high risk of getting injured by needles when serving patients. According to Higginson and Parry (2013) a large number of healthcare professionals, such as nurses who have reported incidences of needlestick injuries indicated that they were tired at the time they were injured, thereby lacking proper concentration. Also, Wicker et al (2014) indicates that tiredness among healthcare workers, especially those working for long hours or in congested healthcare settings are usually at high risk of getting needlestick injuries. Table 1 also indicates that failure to adhere the safety guidelines provided to healthcare workers when serving patients using sharp objects and needles poses huge risk of getting injured by needlesticks. Joseph et al (2014) indicates that in South India, healthcare workers reports most of the injuries as arising from failure of safety guidelines not being followed before and after using needles. For example, failure of used needlsticks being disposed properly increases the risk of injures among the healthcare professionals. Chambers, Mustard and Etches (2015) argues that in the Canadian setting the high cases of injuries have been reported due to failure of some of healthcare professionals adhering to safety guidelines on how needles are supposed to be used and disposed.

Furthermore, table 1 reveals that third parties can also cause injuries associated to needlestick to an individual working in a healthcare setting. For example, patient movement during injection and colleagues mistakenly injuring someone during a surgery can also be factors that pose a threat of needlestick injuries within the healthcare setting. According to Wicker et al (2014) there is a substantial numbers of injuries among healthcare professionals associated with sharp objects, such as needlesticks that have been reported as caused by third parties. Patient movement, especially during injections exposes the healthcare worker, such as a nurse to the risk of injuring herself with a needle. In addition, work or family related stress can also increase the risk of one getting injured by needlestick when providing care to patients. Rohde et al (2013) indicates stress among nurses have been reported as having caused needlestick injuries in a number of cases, as it reduces their levels of concentration, thereby increasing the threat of getting injured by sharp objects when serving patients. Finally, Wicker et al (2014) reveals that at times some safety measures end up failing to work, and this puts the healthcare professionals at risk of having injuries from needlesticks.

            Prevention measures: A number of prevention measures around the globe have been devised as ways of reducing injuries associated with needlestick and other sharp objects within healthcare settings. Chambers, Mustard and Etches (2015) points out that adoption of safety-engineered needles in the Canadian healthcare setting has reduced cases of needlestick injuries with a margin of 40% in the recent years. This shows that the using of safety-engineered needles can work effectively in preventing injuries when using needlesticks, especially when injecting patients with medications. Wicker et al (2014) indicates that there is need of elimination of unnecessary injections to patients by healthcare workers as a way of preventing needlestick injuries. The move would have a positive impact in reducing the risk of expose. Alternatively, Higginson and Parry (2013) indicate that needlestick injuries threat can be reduced by having healthcare workers immunized against HPV virus. The goal of the immunization is to ensure that even after being exposed to injuries, then the threat of developing fatal infections related to bloodborne injuries, reduced the threat of having diseases, such as HIV. Riddell, Kennedy and Tong (2015) reveal that following safety standards universally acceptable while using needles to make injections and after using them can help in reducing the threat of needlestick injuries. For example, when needlesticks are properly disposed after use, then the threat of injuries arising from them reduces significantly.

Discussion

            Importance of results to public health: Research is critical in helping policy makers in the field of public health to make evidence based policies on different issues of concern. The findings presented in this paper are significant to public health in Canada and different parts of the world as far as dealing with the occupational hazard of needlestick injuries is concerned. First, the findings of this research are significant in creating awareness of the major threat presented by healthcare setting needlestick injuries, especially the levels of prevalence. For instance, the findings by Wicker et al (2014) indicating that deaths have been reported among healthcare professionals as a result of fatal infections developed after needlestick injuries shows that the issue is of major public health policy concern. Therefore, high level of prevalence would help the public health policy makers understand the huge threat the workplace needlestick injuries posses to healthcare professionals. For example, the findings of the research can be used by the public health policy makers to advocate for funding from the government in Canada to support various safety measures aimed at reducing the high cases reported of needlestick injuries among the healthcare professionals in the future.

Also, the findings of the study are important to the field of public health as they reveal some of the major causes of needlestick injuries. For example, the study reveals that stress, tiredness, failure to adhere to safety guidelines on use and disposal of needlesticks are the leading causes of needlestick injuries in the workplace. Higginson and Parry (2013) study revealed that healthcare professionals, such as nurses who have reported incidences of needlestick injuries indicated that they were tired at the time they were injured, thereby lacking proper concentration. Thus, based in the literature evidence presented in this study showing the major causes of injuries among the healthcare professionals associated with needlesticks, it would be easier to come up with public health policies and measures aimed at dealing with factors that puts healthcare workers at risk of getting injured by sharp objects, such as needlestick in the cause of offering healthcare services to the patients.

Last but not least, the findings of this research can be useful in providing strategic direction in the field of public health, especially in developing the rules of controlling inflections arising from needlestick injuries. For example, the findings presented in the paper by Chambers, Mustard and Etches (2015) indicating that the causes of needlestick injuries in Ontario Canada since 2011 have reduced significantly, following the implementation of the safety-engineered needles, can be used as basis of adopting safety-engineered needles in other parts of Canada and different parts in the world as way of handling needlestick injuries among the healthcare professionals. Some of the safety measures that can be effectively used in dealing with needlestick injuries within a healthcare setting as presented in this research includes immunization against HPV virus, using the acceptable universal standards in use and disposal of needles and adhering to safety guidelines on how to use the best safety-engineered needs or techniques. The measures can be part of public healthcare policy in handling the high cases of injuries arising from needlesticks among healthcare professionals in the future.

            Challenges, barriers and opportunities: The findings of this research reveals that the biggest challenge to healthcare population policies on needlestick injuries is lack of education among the members of the public on the risk and dangers associated with occupational hazard of injuries arising from sharp objects in healthcare setting. Wicker et al (2014) indicates that most of the people lacks awareness of the major threat that needlestick injuries poses to healthcare workers, and thus, it becomes difficult to pass public policies that can enhance their safety, especially when the public lack appropriate information on the dangers associated with this problem.

The findings of the study, reveals that when offering healthcare services, the trauma associated with needlestick injuries can result in the care providers failing to provide quality care. According to Higginson and Parry (2013) when exposed to needlestick injuries healthcare professionals end up being traumatized and stressed, something that impacts negatively on their capabilities of providing appropriate healthcare services to the patients that are of high quality in the future, where injections and use of sharp objects is involved. However, the findings of this study provide a great opportunity for improving healthcare and clinical services to the members of the public as well as healthcare workers. First, the findings of the study can be used in guiding policy making in area of developing rule of controlling and reducing the hazard of needlestick injuries. For instance, the findings that reveals what causes the injuries and some of the effective measures that have worked in other jurisdictions can be basis of informing safety measures of reducing cases of needlestick injuries among healthcare professionals, such as nurses in the future, leading to improve patient satisfaction and quality of care, as they will be served by happy nurses who fear of getting needle injuries is minimal. Furthermore, the findings of this study would be useful in understanding some of the dangers that healthcare professionals get exposed to when they are injured by needlesticks, as part of creating awareness among healthcare workers, so as to act in cautious way, particularly by following safety guidelines put in place to minimize the risks of injuries and fatal infections associated with sharp object injuries in a healthcare setting.

            Research limitations and recommendations for further research: the major limitation of this study is that it is based on secondary data, which was collected in different periods using varying research methods, and this might have reduced the accuracy of some of the findings presented in this paper. Also, the use of non-primary and empirical data, may have limited the capability of the research paper coming up with new set of information related to how needlestick injuries can be handle within the healthcare setting in the future. Primary data can be essential in revealing new trends or findings on the subject of the study, thereby forming the basis of generating new knowledge that can be useful in addressing the issue of needlestick injuries in the future. Hence, it would be recommendable for an empirical evidence based research to be carried out on the subject of the study, particularly on the causes of the needlestick injuries and prevention methods. The use of empirical based research would help in coming up with findings that are more accurate and reliable in handling the causes of needlestick injuries in the healthcare setting in Canada and other parts of the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Chambers, A., Mustard, C. A., & Etches, J. (2015). Trends in needlestick injury incidence following regulatory change in Ontario, Canada (2004–2012): an observational study. BMC health services research, 15(1), 127.

Higginson, R., & Parry, A. (2013). Needlestick injuries and safety syringes: a review of the literature. British Journal of Nursing, 22(Sup5), S4-S12.

Joseph, N. M., Elan, S., Vadivu, S., & Kanungo, R. (2014). Needlestick injuries among healthcare workers of a tertiary care hospital in South India. Infection control and hospital epidemiology, 35(1), 103-105.

Kevitt, F., & Hayes, B. (2014). Sharps injuries in a teaching hospital: changes over a decade. Occupational Medicine, 65(2), 135-138.

Riddell, A., Kennedy, I., & Tong, C. Y. (2015). Management of sharps injuries in the healthcare setting. BMJ, 351, h3733.

Rohde, K. A., Dupler, A. E., Postma, J., & Sanders, A. (2013). Minimizing nurses’ risks for needlestick injuries in the hospital setting. Workplace health & safety, 61(5), 197-202.

Wicker, S., Stirn, A. V., Rabenau, H. F., von Gierke, L., Wutzler, S., & Stephan, C. (2014). Needlestick injuries: causes, preventability and psychological impact. Infection, 42(3), 549-552.

 

Research Paper: Select a CAM modality, product or service, either from the class presentations or another source (instructor approval), and develop a research paper that makes an in depth review of this. Summarize your findings (7-9 pages in length),

double space, 12 pt font, properly cited APA style references

• Overview/explanation  of the modality
• General pattern of use in the US or internationally
• Benefits or claims of this product or therapy
• Possible or proven risks, or possible harm
• Comparison of the conventional medicine to the CAM modality
• Any research contributing to the CAM modality
• Conclusions/recommendations for consumers (including yourself)

Aromatherapy

One of the widely used alternative and complementary forms of medicine today in the U.S and internationally is the aromatherapy. According to Buckle (2014) aromatherapy usually make use of plant materials as well as aromatic oil from plants, such as essential oils and other known aroma compounds for purposes of improving the physical or psychological well-being of an individual. Newcomer (2014) notes that aromatherapy applies essential oil that is concentrated and extracted from the leaves, roots, blossoms and seeds of plants for purposes of promoting healing. The oil during aromatherapy can either be messaged into an individual’s skin, inhaled or take through the mouth (Newcomer, 2014). In addition, the oil can be issued through immersing it into water in order to stimulate the intended response from an individual. The essential oils during aromatherapy are used for different purposes, whereby, some are used for treatment of infections or inflammation and others help in promoting relaxation in a patient.

Aromatherapy at times is offered as a form of complementary theory and in some cases as an alternative medicine (Price and Price, 2007). In situations where it is used as complementary theory is usually offered together with standard treatment, but in the case of alternative medicine a patient is offered it instead of getting conventional medicine, which are evidence-based in nature (Buckle, 2014).

So far no tangible evidence exists indicating that aromatherapy can be effective in curing and preventing any form of diseases (Newcomer, 2014). Nonetheless, it can be useful in improving the general well-being of an individual. The utilization of essential oils for spiritual, hygienic, ritualistic and therapeutic purposes can be traced back in numerous civilizations, such as the Indians, Egyptians, Chinese, Romans and Greeks who used to utilize them in perfumes, drugs and cosmetics. The aromatherapy concept was initiated in the field of medicine in 1907 by a small group of European doctors and scientists. The use of aromatherapy was pioneered during WWII by Jean Valnet a surgeon who used to treat French soldiers using essential oils in providing antiseptics treatment to the wounded soldiers.

There are different types of materials that are used in aromatherapy. Absolutes are widely used materials and tend to be fragrant oils which are extracted basically from delicate plant or flowers tissues through supercritical or solvent extraction approach (Buckle, 2014). Aroma lamps are aloes used and are usually electric devices which ensures essential oils is volatilized, when mixed using water (Price and Price, 2007). Carrier oils are used in aromatherapy and are basically oily plant based triacylglycerides, which help in dilution of essential oils for application on a skin. Other types of materials include infusions, herbal hydrosols or herbal distillates, essentials oils, vaporizers and phytoncides (Buckle 2014). Therefore, the use of aromatherapy as form of alternative as well as complementary medicine is still under development, especially whereby, more studies are being carried out to determine its effectiveness in healing of various forms of illnesses.

In the U.S, the U.S of aromatherapy as an alternative as well as complementary medicine is gaining popularity. According to the U.S laws, any drug related product should be regulated by FDA (U.S Food and Drug Administration). FDA does not regulate the use of most of the essential oils that are used in aromatherapy, as they are not form of medicine used in fully healing of certain illnesses, but rather help in improvement of the well-being of the users (Price and Price, 2007). Nonetheless, use of essential oils, which has the healing power of certain diseases are regulated by FDA to ensure that they do not cause harm to the users. The FDA has to approve their use before they can be sold to the public through various channels. Therefore, currently, in the U.S most of the essential oil products applied in aromatherapy is noted regulated by FDA.

The U.S center for diseases has been carrying out studies with an objective of enhancing the use of aromatherapy as an alternative or complementary treatment. The studies have focused on how to deal with risks associated with the use of essential oils in aromatherapy and enhance their effectiveness in treatment of patients. The move has played a central role in ensuring that there is wide spread adoption of aromatherapy in the U.S.  Most of the people in the U.S, do not make use of aromatherapy products for healing purposes, but rather they are currently widely using them for purposes of preventing diseases. Aromatherapy is widely used in helping people to relax, especially in message sessions (Buckle, 2014).

A big number of the U.S population has come to accept aromatherapy as a good for complementary medicine that is essential in improving physical and psychological well-being of an individual. As a result, the rate at which aromatherapy products are being used for the last one decade has increased at high rate, an indication that people have come to accept that aromatherapy is critical in improving their health and preventing various forms of illnesses.

However, Price and Price (2007) notes that aromatherapy products as forms of alternative medicine have not yet gained a lot of popularity among the healthcare professionals. Instead of using aromatherapy in treatment of patients in the U.S, most of the healthcare professionals prefer making use of evidenced-based treatment approaches. This shows that the use of aromatherapy as an alternative medicine has not yet managed to gain the required popularity among the healthcare professionals. Thus, a lot of research studies need to be carried out with an objective of providing more evidence to show the healing capability of various aromatherapy products so that it can be widely accepted as form of alternative medicine in the future by most of the healthcare professionals (Buckle, 2014).

The use of aromatherapy as form of complementary and alternative medicine is associated with numerous benefits to the users. First, according to Newcomer (2014) aromatherapy is used in reducing pain in a person. For example, during the WWII a French surgeon would make use of aromatherapy products, especially essential oils as form of atheistic to reduce pain in the wounds of the wounded soldiers. This clearly shows that aromatherapy is beneficially when it comes to helping a person who has pain as a result of injury or other body processes to reduce it through using essential oil products.

Additionally, aromatherapy is useful when it comes to reducing anxiety and depression among the users. According to Muzzarelli, Force and Sebold (2006) aromatherapy is useful in reducing pre-procedural anxiety. Aromatherapy message helps in making the brain relax, thereby ensuring that a person overcomes fear that is associated with undergoing a major medical procedure, such as surgery. Therefore, aromatherapy is beneficial in helping patient to overcome anxiety that can make a medical procedure ineffective. This shows that it is used to complement conventional medicine during major procedures by being applied, especially through message to help patients relax before a certain procedures that are life threatening, such as surgeries can be performed on them (Muzzzarelli, Force and Sebold, 2006).

One of the major causes of depression is usually stress. Kuriyama et al (2005) indicates that one of the widely spread application of aromatherapy is in the area of stress relief. Aromatic compounds obtained from various essential oils tend to be referred as relaxants, thereby, aid in soothing one mind, relieving some stress feelings. Thus, the use of aromatherapy is beneficial to the users as it help them to overcome stress in their day to day activities, preventing a situation where long-term stress can lead them to develop depression (Kiruyama et al, 2005).

Furthermore, Price and Price (2007) argue that aromatherapy is beneficial when it comes to improving the immune system of an individual. The essential oils have compounds that boost the ability of the body to protect itself against certain types of illnesses, such as cold and others. For example, olive oil is widely used in the world in helping young child boost their immunity, especially against illnesses, such as cold. This indicates that the use of aromatherapy compounds can be beneficial to the users by ensuring that their immunity systems are strong, thereby ensuring that they can be able to deal with various common illnesses.

On the other hand, Buckle (2014) points out that aromatherapy are useful in helping improve digestion in the individual users. Essential oils have compounds that are good in improving the ability of the body to digest food in the right way. Therefore, those who have digestion problems can make use of aromatherapy as means of enhancing their ability to digest food in the future.

Furthermore, aromatherapy is useful in helping cancer patient. According to Chang and Shen (2013) aromatherapy is useful as form of supportive medicine to patients suffering from cancer. It can be useful in aiding in the process of helping the patient overcome pain, stress and anxiety related with cancer treatment process. Chang and Shen (2013) shows that aromatherapy is useful in making sure that it boost the brain capacity of persons to deal with stress and other psychological problems, and this makes it useful when helping cancer patients.

Finally, aromatherapy is useful in improvement of the emotional as well as spiritual wellbeing of the people. Around the world, especially in India and China, aromatherapy products, such as essential oil compounds are used in spiritual rituals to help an individual mainly reflects on his or her spiritual wellbeing. Also, it is widely used in improving the emotional wellbeing of a person through relaxation and stress relieving, especially when administered in the form of message (Price and Price, 2007).

There are a number of risks and safety concerns that are associated with the use of aromatherapy as an alternative or complementary medicine. First, lack of evidence associated with its therapeutic benefits; usually make the use of aroma compounds in the treatment process questionable (Posadzki, Alotaibi and Ernst, 2012). Therefore, lack of evidence to show how aromatherapy benefits the patients make it use as alternative medicine risky.

Additionally, due to the fact that essential oils have high levels concentration they can cause skin irritation in cases where they are used when undiluted. In addition, a number of essential oils tend to have some chemical elements that are very sensitisers: whereby when used in numerous occasions they react with the skin causing irritation (Posadzki, Alotaibi and Ernst, 2012). Also, the use of aromatherapy, especially the bioactive substances have been proved to cause harm to lactating and pregnant women. This shows that their use is not safe for women who are pregnant as it can be hazardous to them. Another risk that is associated with use of aromatherapy is self-application of the oil among the patients. Some individuals do not have adequate information concerning the level of dosage that is essential in helping to overcome certain problems and they might end up using overdose that might prove to be harmful to their health in the long-term.

Finally, some essential oil compounds when used in the wrong way can be harmful to children as they can even cause death.  These toxic elements usually cause liver damage as well as seizures which occur after ingestion of thuja, cedar or sage. Therefore, it is essential to ensure that accidental ingestion of the oil used in aromatherapy does not occur by ensuring that these products are kept out of reach of young children.

When compared to conventional medicine, aromatherapy is not widely used in treatment of patient by healthcare professionals. According to Buckle (2014) aromatherapy usage among healthcare professionals is not widely spread due to the fact that there is lack of evidence concerning its effectiveness and safety when it comes to treatment of various illnesses. This shows that conventional medicine has an upper hand in treatment of various illnesses among the healthcare professionals due to its ability to have available evidence concerning it effectiveness in treatment of different illnesses (Price and Price, 2007). However, in most cases aromatherapy is used as a form of complementary medicine, where it is used together with conventional medicine in treatment of patients. This shows that conventional medicine is effectively used in treatment of patients, especially in curing and prevention of diseases, but aromatherapy is mainly utilized in the area of improving their physical and psychological well being rather than prevention or cure of any diseases (Buckle, 2014).

Several studies have been carried out with an objective of determining the effectiveness of aromatherapy as form of alternative medicine. The studies have focused mainly on determining whether aromatherapy can be useful in treating patient suffering from various illnesses. Most of the studies have indicated that aromatherapy generally helps in improving the well-being of the patient; nonetheless, no substantial medical evidence is available so far to show that it can be useful in curing or preventing diseases. For example, the Australian Government’s Department of Health in 2015 published results of a research carried out to examine the effectiveness of different alternative therapies as forms of medicine, and found out that there is no evidence to show the effectiveness of aromatherapy as an alternative medicine, especially in the area of curing or preventing illnesses. Thus, this shows the available evidence from various studies that have been carried out on aromatherapy shows that it efficacy in treatment of various medical conditions is poor (Watt and Janca, 2008).

In summary, this research shows that aromatherapy is useful in improving the physical and psychological wellbeing of the patients (Price and Price, 2007). The products used in aromatherapy are extracted from plants, and they are mainly in the form of oil, which is given to the patient through messaging, ingestion or inhaling (Newcomer, 2014). The findings of the research show that there is no evidence to show the effectiveness of aromatherapy in prevention and cure of diseases, making it use limited among the healthcare professionals. In conclusion, it is recommendable that people use aromatherapy as means of improving their physical and psychological wellbeing. When using any aromatherapy oil for treatment purposes, especially in curing and prevention of disease it is critical to make sure that it has FDA approval to ensure that it safe for human consumption.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Buckle, J. (2014). Clinical Aromatherapy-E-Book: Essential Oils in Practice. Elsevier Health Sciences.

Chang, K. M., & Shen, C. W. (2011). Aromatherapy benefits autonomic nervous system regulation for elementary school faculty in Taiwan. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 2011.

Kuriyama, H., Watanabe, S., Nakaya, T., Shigemori, I., Kita, M., Yoshida, N., … & Imanishi, J. (2005). Immunological and psychological benefits of aromatherapy massage. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 2(2), 179-184.

Muzzarelli, L., Force, M., & Sebold, M. (2006). Aromatherapy and reducing preprocedural anxiety: A controlled prospective study. Gastroenterology Nursing, 29(6), 466-471.

Newcomer, L. (2014). 11 Alternative Medicines Explained. [online] Greatist. Available at: https://greatist.com/health/alternative-medicine-therapies-explained [Accessed 25 Jul. 2017].

Posadzki, P., Alotaibi, A., & Ernst, E. (2012). Adverse effects of aromatherapy: a systematic review of case reports and case series. International Journal of Risk & Safety in Medicine, 24(3), 147-161.

Price, S., & Price, L. (Eds.). (2007). Aromatherapy for health professionals. Elsevier Health Sciences.

Watt, G. V. D., & Janca, A. (2008). Aromatherapy in nursing and mental health care. Contemporary nurse, 30(1), 69-75.