Combining biosafety expert’s evaluation and workers’ perception regarding the Biological Risks in Biomedical laboratories of Public Hospitals in Athens, Greece

  • Dionysios Vourtsis Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of West Attica, Athens, Greece
  • Efstathia Papageorgiou Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of West Attica, Athens, Greece
  • Anastasios Kriebardis Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of West Attica, Athens, Greece
  • George Albert Karikas Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of West Attica, Athens, Greece
  • Gijsbert van Willigen Medical Center, Leiden University, Leiden, Holland
  • Kostas Kotrokois Department of Public Health Policies, University of West Attica, Athens, Greece
  • Georgios Dounias Department of Public Health Policies, University of West Attica, Athens, Greece
  • Petros Karkalousos Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of West Attica, Athens, Greece
Keywords: Biorisk Management, Biosafety, Biological Risk Assessment, Biomedical laboratories, Laboratory personnel awareness, Biosafety legislation

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of the present study was by combining an expert’s evaluation and laboratory workers’ perception, to review the biological risks in biomedical laboratories of public hospitals in Athens, Greece. It was also to evaluate how they are managing the biological materials, the level of safety awareness and training of the personnel, and to propose mitigation measures according to the existing risks, based on the local legislation and the international Biosafety guidelines. Materials and Methods: A total of 36 biosafety level-2 (BSL2) biomedical laboratories in 20 public hospitals were assessed for their biosafety containment specifics and compliance with biosafety practices. The study was designed as a cross-sectional study, with a checklist and a detailed health and safety (H&S) questionnaire, focused on biosafety and biorisk management. An expert biosafety officer observed and filled in a checklist for each biomedical laboratory (n=36) of the 20 hospitals. Laboratory staff (medical laboratory doctors, medical laboratory technologists, laboratory assistants, biologists and biochemists; n = 415) filled in a specific to biosafety H&S question­naire in each of these laboratories. Results: Both the results from the checklists and the questionnaires showed that in a significant percentage of laboratories there are the following deficiencies: restricted access and signage at the entrance, autoclaves in the laboratory area, ability to use the washbasins hands-free, biorisk management system, written risk assessments, biosafety manuals, standard operating procedures (SOPs), assigned biosafety officers, protocols  about the use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), insufficient biosafety training programs, accidents reporting, eyewash emergency shower system, first aid kits and emergency telephone numbers. On the positive site laboratory procedures are separated from management, sanitary and rest areas, laboratory surfaces and floors are easy to clean and disinfect, good laboratory Practices followed for all procedures, waste management is in compliance with the current Greek legislation and there are sufficient PPE available. Conclusion: In the laboratories studied there are significant shortcomings in containment and administrative controls, in the application of Greek and EU biosafety legislation, and in the proper management of biological agents and materials in general. This emphasizes the importance of closing key gaps in biosafety and emergency preparedness, in the biomedical laboratories. Using the results of this study, actions should be developed, applied and enforced, in compliance with the local and European legislation and guidelines. This could enhance the safety of these facilities, and the laboratory professionals, the community and the environment could be better protected from possible harmful biological agents and the possibility of Laboratory acquired infections (LAIs). This study also demonstrated the value of the laboratory workers participation in the risk evaluation, despite their propensity to over or under-estimate the risk level of the possible hazards. That fact should be considered in future studies when enhancing hospital staff.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

1. Bathula, S. R., & Rakhimol, A. (2017). Global Trends in biorisk Management. BioRisk, 12, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.3897/biorisk.12.12156
2. Brown, C.S., Zwetyenga, J., Berdieva, M., Volkova T., Cojocaru R., Costic N., Ciobanu, S., Hasanova, S., van Beers, S., Oskam, L. (2015). New policy-formulation methodology paves the way for sustainable laboratory systems in Europe. Public Health Panor. 2015; 1(1):41-7.
3. Blacksell, S. D., Dhawan, S., Kusumoto, M., Lě, K., Summermatter, K., O’Keefe, J., Kozlovac, J. P., Almuhairi, S. S., Sendow, I., Scheel, C. M., Ahumibe, A., Masuku, Z. M., Bennett, A., Kojima, K., Harper, D. R., & Hamilton, K. (2023). Laboratory-acquired infections and pathogen escapes worldwide between 2000 and 2021: a scoping review. The Lancet Microbe. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2666-5247(23)00319-1
4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), (2020). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service. National Institutes of Health. Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories. 6th ed. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/labs/pdf/SF__19_308133-A_BMBL6_00-BOOK-WEB-final-3.pdf (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), (2021). Hierarchy of Controls. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/learning/safetyculturehc/module-3/2.html (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
6. Directive 2000/54/EC, (2000). Directive 2000/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2000 on the protection of workers from risks related to exposure to biological agents at work (seventh individual directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC). Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32000L0054&from=EN (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
7. European Committee for Standardization, (2011). CEN Workshop Agreement. CWA 15793:2011, Laboratory Biorisk Management Standard. Available at: https://internationalbiosafety.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/CWA-15793-English.pdf (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
8. Farr, J.M., Shatkin, L. (2004). Best jobs for the 21st century. JIST Works. p. 460. ISBN 978-1-56370-961-6.
9. Gribble, L.A., Tria, E.S., and Wallis, L. (2015). ‘The AMP Model,’ in Salerno, R.M. and Gaudioso, J. (ed.) Laboratory Biorisk Management: Biosafety and Biosecurity, Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, pp. 31-42.
10. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), (2019). ISO 35001:2019. Biorisk management for laboratories and other related organizations. Available at: https://www.iso.org/standard/71293.html (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
11. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), (2020). ISO 15190:2020. Medical laboratories – Requirements for safety. Available at: https://www.iso.org/standard/72191.html (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
12. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), (2022). ISO 15189:2022. Medical laboratories – Requirements for quality and competence. Available at: https://www.iso.org/standard/76677.html (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
13. Kessel, M. (2014). Neglected diseases, delinquent diagnostics. Science Translational Medicine, 6(226). https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.3008194
14. National Institutes of Health (NIH), (2024). NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant or Synthetic Nucleic Acid Molecules (NIH Guidelines). DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, National Institutes of Health. Available at: https://osp.od.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/NIH_Guidelines.pdf (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
15. Pike, R.M. (1976). Laboratory-associated infections. Summary and analysis of 3921 cases. Health and Laboratory Science vol 13, page 105-114.
16. Presidential Decree 102/2020 (Government Gazette 244/A’/07.12.2020), (2020). Available at: https://www.et.gr/api/DownloadFeksApi/?fek_pdf=20200100244 and https://www.gov.gr/sdg/work-and-retirement/health-and-safety-at-work/independent-authority-labour-inspectorate/obligations-of-companies (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
17. Raafat H, Sadhra SS. Risk characterization. (1999). In: Sadhra SS, Rampal KG, editors. Occupational health: risk assessment and management. 4th ed. Oxford (UK): Blackwell Science Ltd; 1999. pp. 177–193.
18. Salerno, M.R. and Gaudioso, J. (2015). ‘Introduction: The Case for Biorisk Management,’ in Salerno, M.R. and Gaudioso, J. (ed.) Laboratory Biorisk Management: Biosafety and Biosecurity, Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, pp. 1-23.
19. Sandia National Laboratories, (2014). Laboratory Biosafety and Biosecurity Risk Assessment Technical Guidance Document. Available at: https://internationalbiosafety.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Laboratory-Biosafety-and-Biosecurity-Risk-Assessment.pdf (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
20. Sewell, D. L. (1995). Laboratory-associated infections and biosafety. Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 8(3), 389–405. https://doi.org/10.1128/cmr.8.3.389
21. Tun, T. A. (2017). Biomedical Laboratory: its safety and risk management. Journal of Experimental & Biomedical Sciences/Biomedical Science Letters, 23(3), 155–160. https://doi.org/10.15616/bsl.2017.23.3.155
22. Tziaferi, S., Sourtzi, P., Kalokairinou, A., Sgourou, E., Koumoulas, E., & Velonakis, E. (2011b). Risk assessment of physical hazards in Greek hospitals combining staff’s perception, experts’ evaluation and objective measurements. Safety and Health at Work, 2(3), 260–272. https://doi.org/10.5491/shaw.2011.2.3.260
23. Vourtsis, D., Papageorgiou, E., Kriebardis, A., Karikas, G. A., Van Willigen, G., & Karkalousos, P. (2022). A swift risk analysis for COVID-19 testing facilities using rapid tests. One Health & Risk Management, 3(4), 48–66. https://doi.org/10.38045/ohrm.2022.4.05
24. 2004 RA., Singh K. (2009). Laboratory-acquired infections. Clinical Infectious Diseases, Volume 49, Issue 1, 1 July 2009, Pages 142–147,. https://doi.org/10.1086/599104
25. World Health Organization (WHO), (2004). Laboratory Biosafety Manual. 3rd ed. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9241546506 (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
26. World Health Organization (WHO), (2005). International Health Regulations, Joint external evaluation tool – third edition. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240051980 (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
27. World Health Organization (WHO), (2010). Responsible life sciences research for global health security, A guidance document. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-HSE-GAR-BDP-2010.2 (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
28. World Health Organization (WHO), (2011). Laboratory Quality Management System: handbook, Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241548274 (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
29. World Health Organization (WHO), (2014). Training Report, Hands-on Training Workshop on Cell Culture Techniques for the Laboratory Diagnosis of Polio/Enteroviruses and Measles/ Rubella in the Western Pacific Region. Available at: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/208735/RS_2014_GE_11_HOK_eng.pdf?sequence=1 (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
30. World Health Organization (WHO), (2016). Development of national laboratory policies, Best practices document and facilitators’ guide. Available at: https://www.who.int/europe/publications/i/item/WHO-EURO-2017-5659-45424-65013 (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
31. World Health Organization (WHO), (2020). Laboratory Biosafety Manual. 4th ed. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240011311 (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
32. World Health Organization (WHO), (2020). Laboratory biosafety manual, 4th edition: Biosafety programme management. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240011434 (Accessed: 03 July 2024)
33. Wurtz, N., Papa, A., Hukić, M., Di, A., Leparc-Goffart, I., Leroy, E. M., Landini, M., Sekeyová, Z., Dumler, J. S., Bădescu, D., Busquets, N., Calistri, A., Parolin, C., Palù, G., Christova, I., Maurin, M., La Scola, B., & Raoult, D. (2016). Survey of laboratory-acquired infections around the world in biosafety level 3 and 4 laboratories. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, 35(8), 1247–1258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-016-2657-1
Published
2024-07-08
How to Cite
Vourtsis, D., Papageorgiou, E., Kriebardis, A., Karikas, G. A., van Willigen, G., Kotrokois, K., Dounias, G., & Karkalousos, P. (2024). Combining biosafety expert’s evaluation and workers’ perception regarding the Biological Risks in Biomedical laboratories of Public Hospitals in Athens, Greece. European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 31, 62. Retrieved from https://eujournal.org/index.php/esj/article/view/18321
Issue
Vol 31 (2024): ESI Preprints
Section
ESI Preprints

Copyright (c) 2024 Dionysios Vourtsis, Efstathia Papageorgiou, Anastasios Kriebardis, George Albert Karikas, Gijsbert van Willigen, Kostas Kotrokois, Georgios Dounias, Petros Karkalousos

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Most read articles by the same author(s)