Enhanced Analysis and Development of Technical Features, Performance, and Occupational Safety in Syringe Needle Destroyers for Advancing Medical Standards
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
บทคัดย่อ
This paper aims to evaluate the overall suitability of syringe needle destruction devices (SNDDs) in healthcare environments by analyzing how technical attributes, operational performance, and safety/usability influence user acceptance. While SNDDs are widely implemented to reduce needlestick injuries (NSIs) and improve waste management, critical design issues such as overheating, inefficient needle insertion, and limited ergonomic safety remain inadequately addressed. A structured 5-point Likert scale questionnaire was administered to 400 healthcare professionals in Bangkok, including nurses, physicians, medical technologists, and sanitation staff, each with a minimum of six months of device experience. The assessment focused on three key dimensions: technical quality (e.g., destruction reliability, structural design, electrical safety), performance (e.g., destruction speed, consistency), and usability/safety (e.g., ergonomics, heat exposure, ease of operation). Multiple linear regression revealed that technical attributes were the most significant positive predictor of overall suitability (β₁ = 0.1450, p < 0.0001), while operational performance (β₂ = –0.0251, p = 0.0797) and safety/usability (β₃ = –0.0113, p = 0.4186) had negligible or slightly negative effects. The regression model exhibited strong explanatory power (R² ≈ 0.66), and residual analysis confirmed its statistical adequacy. These results highlight the central role of robust technical engineering in shaping user satisfaction and acceptance, emphasizing that structural integrity, mechanical reliability, and conformity to ISO/IEC safety standards outweigh incremental gains in operational speed or superficially integrated safety features. The findings demonstrate that high-quality technical design directly supports clinical usability, operational safety, and confidence in daily device deployment.
Article Details
เอกสารอ้างอิง
Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1979). A simple test for heteroscedasticity and random coefficient variation. Econometrica, 47(5), 1287–1294. doi:10.2307/1911963
Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Cooke, C. E., & Stephens, J. M. (2017). Clinical, economic, and humanistic burden of needlestick injuries in healthcare workers. Medical Devices: Evidence and Research, 10, 225–235. doi:10.2147/MDER.S140846
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334. doi:10.1007/BF02310555
Firdaus, A., Ferdana, N., Mujakar, S., Satrio, H., & Zulhamidi. (2024). Design and development of syringe needle destroyer using melting method. EMITOR: Jurnal Teknik Elektro, 1(2), 41–52. doi:10.23917/emitor.v24i3.4494
Green, S. B. (1991). How many subjects does it take to do a regression analysis? Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26(3), 499–510. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr2603_7
Higginson, R. J., & Parry, A. (2013). Needlestick injuries and safety syringes: A review of the literature. British Journal of Nursing, 22(Suppl. 5), S4–S8. doi:10.12968/bjon.2013.22.Sup5.S4
Jahangiri, M., Rostamabadi, A., Hoboubi, N., Tadayon, N., & Soleimani, A. (2016). Needlestick injuries and their related safety measures among nurses in a university hospital, Shiraz, Iran. Safety and Health at Work, 7(1), 72–77. doi:10.1016/j.shaw.2015.07.006
Kim, S. M., Taerim, K., Lee, J. H., Cho, S. Y., & Cha, W. C. (2022). Effect of the automatic needle destroyer on healthcare providers’ work in an emergency department: A mixed-methods study. Healthcare Informatics Research, 28(2), 123–131. doi:10.4258/hir.2022.28.2.123
Kim, Y., Oh, K., Kim, N., & Yun, J. (2019). Development of a safe syringe disposal system moving towards automated syringe data collection. Healthcare Informatics Research, 25(1), 47–50. doi:10.4258/hir.2019.25.1.47
Laowha, C., Tashoo, K., Boonsaner, N., Premchaisawatt, S., Juntahan, N., & Pranamko, T. (2023). Semi-automatic syringe removal machine to shorten the time. Kalasin University Journal of Science Technology and Innovation, 1(2), 41–52. doi:10.14456/ksti.2022.4
Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 1–55. Retrieved from https://legacy.voteview.com/pdf/Likert_1932.pdf
MathWorks, Inc. (2020). MATLAB (Version R2020a) [Computer software]. Natick, MA: Author. Retrieved from https://www.mathworks.com/
O’Brien, R. M. (2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality & Quantity, 41(5), 673–690. doi:10.1007/s11135-006-9018-6
Shapiro, S. S., & Wilk, M. B. (1965). An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika, 52(3–4), 591–611. doi:10.1093/biomet/52.3-4.591
von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gøtzsche, P. C., & Vandenbroucke, J. P. (2007). Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. Annals of Internal Medicine, 147(8), 573–577. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-147-8-200710160-00010
World Health Organization. (2016). Safe injection and related procedural practices (updated guide). Retrieved from https://www.who.int/publications/b/31378
World Medical Association. (2013). World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA, 310(20), 2191–2194. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.281053
