Observational studyInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020
Assessing Infection Risks among Clients and Staff Who Use Tattooing Services in Poland: An Observational Study.
Observational study in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Permanent Makeup Removal Severe Complication-Case Report and Proposal of the Protocol for Its Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Assessing Undergraduates' Perception of Risks Related to Body Art in Italy: The SUPeRBA Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Across cultures and generations, people have tattooed their bodies. Although blood-borne infections from tattooing have been reduced, certain service aspects remain improperly managed. We assessed the infection risks associated with tattooing by conducting a cross-sectional study (2013-2014) in Poland using an anonymous questionnaire survey. Scoring procedures for blood-borne infection risks for tattooists and their clients were used. Overall, 255 tattooists were interviewed. A quasi-random selection of tattoo parlors was based on a service register. Knowledge, attitudes, and behavior regarding blood-borne infection risks were assessed using a questionnaire. Simultaneously, tattoo centers were audited. Tattooing had a higher infection risk for tattooists than for clients. Approximately 50% of respondents underwent training on postexposure procedures, which constituted almost one in five of the reported needlestick/cut injuries sustained while working. Furthermore, 25.8% had no knowledge regarding risk from reliable sources, and 2.1% had not broadened their knowledge. Tattooists and their clients are at a risk of infection, and knowledge concerning infection risks remains an underestimated preventative factor. Service quality surveillance and creation of a register for tattoo-related complications may help assess the scale of this public health issue. However, a lack of these records implies the challenges in developing effective organizational and legal protections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.