This invention relates to spray shields primarily for use with surgical scissors to protect people from potentially hazardous blood spray when an umbilical cord or any other item is severed.
For more than fifty years, labor and delivery clinicians have used the same method for transecting the umbilical cord. The process includes placing two clamps on the umbilical cord several inches apart from each other and cutting the umbilical cord between the two clamps with surgical scissors. The blood in the umbilical cord between the two clamps remains pressurized and has been known to spray as far as eight feet or more hitting walls, ceiling tiles, drapes, clinicians and others. It is well established that there exists more than twenty blood borne pathogens such as AIDS/HIV, Hepatitis C, sexually transmitted diseases and now the Ebola virus that could be present in the blood spray and which could contaminate those present. Cases of clinician exposure to blood borne pathogens such as HIV/AIDS and sexually transmitted diseases through cord blood spray are well documented. Such cases require extensive, costly and physically demanding prophylactic treatment.
In spite of numerous technological attempts to address this problem, no commercially or functionally viable devices or solutions are available to clinicians to prevent blood spray when cutting the cord. In the majority of cases, the prior art/devices simply did not function as intended. In one instance, the device attempted to combine functions such as preventing spray while also drawing cord blood into vials. In another example, the device was intended to prevent blood spray while simultaneously cutting and clamping the umbilical cord. Those and other known devices were plagued with operational issues involving one or more of these functions and consequently unable to perform the intended functions to the satisfaction of the market. Devices that required a significant departure from existing procedures and new equipment also met with resistance. As with virtually every decision, cost is an important factor and the cost of some devices were considered prohibitive.
With no functional solution available, clinicians try to minimize the impact of umbilical cord blood spray in several different ways. Many clinicians put a hand up near the scissors to act as a shield. Unfortunately, this prevents the clinician from using that hand for clinical or care related functions and momentarily distracts the clinician causing them to focus on their own safety rather than the immediate procedure and the patient's care and safety.
Another approach is to look away when the cord is cut hoping any spray that might occur will hit them somewhere other than the eyes, nose or mouth. Clearly this is undesirable as it is best to have clinicians looking at the task at hand.
Alternatively, some caregivers have even held a towel over the area in an attempt to block the spray. None of these approaches are effective or safe for either the clinician or the patient. Furthermore, they do not comply with the federal requirements as set forth in 29 CFR 1910 generally requiring that employers reduce the risk of blood borne pathogen exposure to employees.
One attempt to address this problem is disclosed as a disposable shield in U.S. Pat. No. 5,542,435 to Kelly, et al. This device was intended to protect only the scissor user. It does not protect any other personnel in the area due to its shape, orientation, location and distance from the source of the spray.
While protecting the clinician cutting the cord, typically a doctor or midwife, is a worthwhile endeavor, a 2012 survey of labor and delivery nurses (i.e. clinicians not cutting the umbilical cord and positioned in physical locations throughout the delivery area) revealed that 95% of those nurses had experienced cord blood spray and 21% had been sprayed within the prior year. Additionally, tests designed to replicate spray from an umbilical cord were recently conducted and the spray pattern analysis indicated that as much as 50% of the spray occurs in a direction other than towards the user. Blood spray is a serious problem to all in the delivery room and is not limited to the clinician cutting the umbilical cord.
A similar potential solution is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. D399,971 to Scherer which approaches the problem in a similar manner as does Kelly, et al., but with a different shield design. Nevertheless, Scherer fails to solve the above-noted shortcomings of Kelly, et al.
As previously mentioned, there is currently no functionally or commercially viable solution in the marketplace for the problem of blood spray resulting from the transection of the umbilical cord or other cutting procedures.