Principles of Medtech
Principles of Medtech
Principles of Medtech
Introduction
The Medical Technology Profession has gone tremendous changes and improvements
over the years. These developments have been very essential and beneficial in the
Health Care delivery system.
There are four stages in the historical development of Medical Technology. The earliest
stage begun in 460 BC, followed by the formulation of the Apothecaries Act of 1815, the
modern onset of the Medical technology in the United States in 1871, and the
establishment of clinical laboratory and medical technology course in the Philippines.
Evidently, Medical Technology is still progressing along with new advancements and
discoveries in the field of Science and Technology. Now and in the future, trends in
Medical Technology practices will help meet the demand of the times by enabling the
introduction of more techniques in treating, diagnosing, preventing, and controlling
infectious diseases in a steadfast and comprehensive manner.
The two most important priorities of medical technology are future challenges in the
roles and contributions of medical laboratory technology, and the effort to address gaps
and shortcomings in the field of Medical Technology
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this unit, students will be able to:
1. Discuss the history of medical technology on a global context.
2. Discuss the history of medical technology in the United States.
3. Discuss the history of medical technology in the Philippines.
4. Identify important personalities that played a significant role in the progress of
medical technology profession.
5. Discuss the historical milestones in Medical Technology
Presentation of Contents
History of Medical Technology on a global context
The evolution of medical technology can be traced to the understanding of the concept
of diseases and infections during ancient times. In 460 BC, Greek physician Hippocrates,
regarded as the founder of scientific medicine, determined the correlation between
anatomical and chemical laboratory findings and the causes of diseases. He adopted the
triad of regimen in treating diseases and infection with the use of drugs, surgery, and
bloodletting.
As early as 1550 BC, Vivian Herrick determined that intestinal parasitic infection
was caused by Ascaris lumbricoides and the Taenia species. This was published in a
book by Ebers Papyrus , which describes the treatment of hookworm disease and
infection transmissible in humans. In the same year, Anenzoa, an Arabian physician, also
proved that the etiological agent of skin diseases, such as scabies, is parasites.
During the medieval period (1098-1438), urinalysis became commonplace and
was a practice that was followed with exaggerated zeal. During that period, some
doctors of dubious credentials in the Indian subcontinent recorded several observations
on the urine of some patients. They determined that the urine of certain patients that
attracted ants had a sweet taste. This information was criticized by some medical
professionals and was even mentioned in the book authored by Ruth Williams, entitled
An Introduction to the Profession of Medical Technology.
In the 14th century, Anna Fagelson strongly confirmed the beginnings of medical
technology when she correlated the cause of death of Alexander Gillani, a laboratory
worker in the University of Bologna, to laboratory-acquired infection.
The 17th century witnessed, with the invention of the first functional crude
microscope by Anton Van Leeuwenhoek, rapid advancements in discoveries. Van
Leeuwenhoek was the first scientist to observe and describe the appearance of red
blood cells, and to differentiate bacteria based on their shape.
MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY IN THE 18TH CENTURY
In the 18th century, medical practitioners in North Africa and Southern Europe
received classical medical education. According to them, there are four basic humors
and the state of balance between these humors can be correlated with the healthy
condition of the human body, and the state of unbalance can be diagnosed by means of
urine examination. The four humors are blood, phlegm, black bile and yellow bile.
Between 1821 and 1902, Rudolf Virchow was recognized as the father of
microscopic pathology. He was the first scientist/physician of the time who emphasized
the study of the manifestation of diseases and infections, which are visible at the cellular
level by means of a microscope.
In the process of evaluating disease and infections, Dr. Calvin Ellis, a
microscopist, was the first to utilize the microscope in examining specimens at the
Massachusetts General Hospital. On the other hand, it was Dr. William Occam who used
laboratory findings as preliminary evidence in diagnosing and evaluating a patient's
disease.
The function of medical technology has become explicitly apparent when the
Apothecaries Act of 1815 intervened and paved the way for an uphaul of medical
treatment based on laboratory findings. This Act was initiated by Baron Karl Von
Humbeldt, who formally used laboratory findings in the treatment of diseases and
infection. The Apothecaries Act 1815 was formulated to better regulate the practice of
apothecaries throughout England and Wales. The Act introduced compulsory
apprenticeship and formal qualifications for apothecaries (in modern terms, general
practitioners) under the license of the Society of Apothecaries. It was the beginning of
regulation of the medical profession in the United Kingdom. The Act required
instruction in anatomy, botany, chemistry, material medical, and “physic," in addition to
six months of practical working experience in a hospital.
HISTORY OF MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY IN THE UNITED STATES
Advances in scientific knowledge in the field of medicine were applicable to both
medical practice and medical education in Europe and America. In the United States,
medical education underwent much needed reforms.
´ Dr. William H. Welch
´ In 1885, Dr. Welch became the first professor of Pathology at John Hopkins University
´ *The first clinical laboratory was opened in 1896 at the John Hopkins Hospital by Dr.
William Osler.
´ * A clinical laboratory was also opened at the University of Pennsylvania in 1896.
(William Pepper Laboratory)
´ Dr. James C. Todd
´ Wrote “A Manual of Clinical Diagnosis”
´ Retitled “Clinical Diagnosis by Laboratory Methods” in the 19 th edition
´ 1900: Census
´ 100 technicians, all male were employed in the United states
´ 1915
´ The state legislature of Pennsylvania enacted a law requiring all hospitals and
institutions to have an adequate laboratory and to employ a full-time laboratory
technician
´ 1920
´ Increased to 3,500
´ 1922
´ 3035 hospitals had clinical laboratories
´ World War I
´ Was an important factor in the growth of the clinical laboratory and produced a great
demand for technicians
´ University of Minnesota
´ Where one of the first schools for training workers was established
´ A course bulletin was entitled “Courses in Medical Technology for Clinical and
Laboratory Technicians” (1922)
´ 1921
´ The Denver Society of Clinical Pathologists was organized
´ 1923
´ University of Minnesota was the first to offer level program
´ World War II
´ The use of blood increased and the “close system” of blood collection was widely
adopted
´ Laboratory medicine certainly moved into an era of sophistication
HISTORY OF MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY IN THE PHILIPPINES
Medical Technology in the Philippines post-World War II
At the end of World War II, the first clinical laboratory in the Philippines was built
and established on Quiricada Street, Sta. CruzManila (where the public health laboratory
is presently located) by the 26th Medical Laboratory of the 6th US Army.
In February 1944, it provided one year of training to high school graduates to
work as laboratory technicians. In June 1945, the staff of the 6th US Army left the facility
after endorsing the newly established Clinical Laboratory to the National Department of
Health. However, its laboratory facilities were not fully utilized and later, it stopped
being used because the science was not popular during those days.
Dr. Pio de Roda, a Filipino doctor who was a dislocated staff of the 26th Medical
Laboratory and a well-known bacteriologist, preserved the remains of the laboratory
with the help of Dr. Mariano Icasiano, the first City Health Officer of Manila. On October
1, 1945, the preserved laboratory was formally re-established by Dr. Pio de Roda with
the help of Dr. Prudencio Sta. Ana. They offered free training to most trainees who were
high school graduates and paramedical graduates. With no specific duration of training
and no certification, the training lasted from a week to a month. In 1954, Dr. Pio de
Roda instructed Dr. Sta. Ana to prepare a syllabus for training medical technicians.
Together with Dr. Tirso Briones, they conducted a six month training course with
certification. However, their project did not last long because the Manila Sanitarium
Hospital and its sister company the Philippine Union College offered a course in medical
technology. In the same year, through the efforts of an American medical practitioner
and a Seventh Day Adventist missionary, Dr. Willa Hilgert Hedrick, founder of medical
technology education in the Philippines, Dr. Reuben Manalaysay; president of the
Philippine Union College, Rev. Warren; president of the North Philippine Mission of the
Seventh Day Adventist and director of the Bureau of Education, established the first
Medical Technology School in the Philippines.
Dr. Hedrick, with the help of Mrs. Antoinette McKelvey, prepared the course
curriculum and established the first complete laboratory in microbiology, parasitology,
and histopathology at the Manila Sanitarium Hospital. In the same year, a five-year
course leading to a Bachelor of Science degree in medical technology was approved by
the Bureau of Education and was finally offered by the Manila Sanitarium Hospital and
the Philippine Union College. In 1956, Mr. Jesse Umali became the first student to
graduate from the Philippine Union College. He later went on to pursue his studies in
medicine and graduated from Far Eastern University.
Other schools had started to offer the course; for instance, in 1957, the
University of Santo Tomas offered an elective course in pharmacy leading to a bachelor
of science in medical technology under the leadership of Dr. Antonio Gabriel and Dr.
Gustavo Reyes. In 1960–61, the Bureau of Education officially approved the first three
years as a three-year academic course and the fourth year as an internship program. At
the same time, Carmen de Luna, President of the Centro Escolar University delegated
Purification Sunico-Suaco to work on offering the medical technology course, which was
later granted a recognition permit by the Bureau of Education and had its first graduates
two years later.
In 1961, through the combined efforts of Dr. Horacio Ylagan and Dr. Serafin J.
Juliano with the authority granted to them by Dr. Lauro H. Panganiban and Dr. Jesus B.
Nolasco, dean of the Institute of Medicine, the Far Eastern University started its School
of Medical Technology, which was formally approved by the Bureau of Education. Dr.
Ylagan became the technical director of the school and had its first graduates in 1963.
Several colleges and universities throughout the country began offering the
bachelor's degree in medical technology. The postgraduate course is now offered at the
University of Santo Tomas and Philippine Women's University.
HISTORICAL MILESTONES IN MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY
MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY AS AN APPLICATION OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Medical technology employs a wide variety of technologies ranging from a
single-lens microscope to dissecting and scanning electron microscopes. Highly
technical instruments such as the auto analyzer in clinical chemistry or the flow
cytometer in histopathology are typically used in tertiary and highly sophisticated
laboratories. Diagnostics is moving toward automation coupled with the use of
computer graphics, recorders, and even calculators. The use of these technologies in the
scientific evaluation of diseases and infection clearly shows that medical technology is
synonymously adjunct and within the ambit of the term “science and technology.
Within the context of science and technology, the prime goal of medical
technology is to engender the cultural and democratic notions of scientific literacy. In
addition, science and technology helps students have a better understanding of
scientific learning in order to become better and responsible citizens. The practical value
of science with regard to humankind can be seen through the advancements in
technology. Science and technology have provided society with various benefits like
improved health and standard of living. The direction that technology takes depends
less on science; its progress and development is determined by the needs of humans
and the values of society.
Medical technology is one discipline that can help students acquire knowledge
beyond the traditional and formal learning about scientific theory, facts, and technical
skills. In addition, it also equip students with a better understanding of scientific learning
and makes them aware of the trends in technological developments, thereby providing
a meaningful impact in their social, political, economic, environmental, and cultural
context of life. Moreover, medical technology has transcended the evaluation of the
health status and condition of every individual member of a society. It is a scientific
discipline that reinforces the concepts and principles of science and technology to
facilitate the understanding of life and the onset of diseases. The concrete application of
these concepts and principles can be seen in the following:
Laboratory Information Systems
With the evolution of electronic and technological devices, clinical laboratories
are also moving toward innovation and meeting the immediate demands of health
laboratory services. This has led to the development of the ultimate science and
technology product-the Laboratory Information System (LIS). Almost all clinical
laboratories, especially those in the tertiary category, use the LIS to release laboratory
results.
Professional Practice
In professional practice, there are always guiding policies that should be strictly
followed. A medical technologist should observe the code of ethics and the patient's
rights. The symbol of a microscope will remain synonymous with medical technology.
Genetic Engineering, Gene Therapy, and Gene Diagnosis
Genetic engineering is the answer to the demands of the current generation. It
enables access to gene therapy and diagnosis. Medical technology uses genetic
engineering methods, especially in cases of detecting genetic disorders such as
hemophilia.
Laboratory Waste Management
Microorganisms are ubiquitous. Thus, the implementation of laboratory
management should continuously and closely monitor how laboratory wastes are
managed, handled, and disposed. These techniques are used to prevent the spread of
communicable diseases.
Laboratory Diagnosis of Diseases of the 21st Century
In highly sophisticated and accredited clinical laboratories, automated and
conventional or manual methods are used. This type of setting ensures the accuracy of
laboratory results in diagnosis of diseases of the 21st century. Epidemiologically
speaking, these diseases may be endemic or epidemic depending on the climatic
changes. For example, the HINI influenza viral infection has become the focus of
attention due to significant infection rates, which signalled a need for accurate
laboratory diagnosis. And just recently the world is facing another challenge this is the
SARS-Cov-2 virus (COVID-19)). It has been considered a pandemic viral infection causing
thousands of deaths worldwide in just a matter of months. Thus the need for very
reliable and accurate laboratory diagnosis for early treatment of the disease.
Scientific Research
Many new products and laboratory procedures have been systematically
established through the efforts and enthusiasm of medical technology professionals.
Current research is moving toward the molecular diagnosis of diseases and infections.
The ultimate goal of medical technology is its commitment to focus on more
discoveries. This goal can be attained through the efforts extended by science and
technology.
Inventions and Innovations in the Field of Medical Laboratory
1660 – Anton Van Leeuwenhoek
- Father of Microbiology
- Known for his work on the improvement of the microscope
1796 – Edward Jenner
- Discovered Vaccination to establish immunity to small pox
- impact of contribution: Immunology
1880 – Marie Francois Xavier Bichat
- Identified organs by the types of tissues
- Imapct of contribution: Histology
Unit 2:DEFINING THE PRACTICE OF THE MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY/CLINICAL
LABORATORY SCIENCE PROFESSION
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this unit, students will be able to:
1. Discuss professional ethics.
2. Recognize and appreciate the Medical Technology ethics and values.
Medical Technology Ethics and Values
Ethical problems associated with medical practice bioscience fall within the scope of
medical technology. Ethics does not only deal with patient-physician relationships from
a moral point of view, but extends to social issues to health, animal welfare, and
environmental concerns.
Types of Ethics
General Ethics
This type of ethics presents truths about human acts, from which the general principle
of morality is deduced.
Special Ethics
This involves the application of the principles of general ethics in different departments
of human activity both at the individual and social levels. Special ethics can be further
divided into individual ethics, which are concerned with God, self, and fellow human
beings; and social ethics, which are concerned with family, the state, and the world.
Professional Ethics
Professional ethics is a branch of moral science that deals with how and what a
professional should or should not do in the workplace. It addresses the question, "What
should I do in this situation?" Professional ethics are intended to bind professions more
tightly together around a shared standard of values. A professional has obligations to
his profession, to the public, and to his or her clients. Moral issues may sometimes arise
in the workplace. Knowledge on professional ethics can guide staff in analyzing
assumptions and arriving at ethical decisions.
A professional who observes professional ethics is exemplified by a person who
observes appropriate conduct and behavior while carrying out his work. This conduct
and behavior should be adopted in all dealings for the good of the community and
humankind.
Code of Professional Ethics
The objectives of professional ethics:
1. Perform duties and responsibilities objectively in accordance with relevant standards
and guidelines.
2. Serve in a lawful and honest manner, while maintaining high standards of conduct
and character and not engage in acts discreditable to the profession.
3. Maintain the privacy and confidentiality of information obtained in the course of duty
unless disclosure is required by a legal authority. Such information should not be used
for personal benefit or released to inappropriate parties.
4. Perform tasks with full confidence, absolute reliability, and accuracy.
5. Be dedicated to the use of clinical laboratory science to promote life and for the
benefit of mankind.
Medical Ethics
This is a field of applied ethics that studies moral values and judgments as they apply to
medicine. Medical ethics are a set of norms, values, and principles that serve as
guidelines for medical practitioners-such as physicians, nurses, medical technologists
and other associated professionals in making decisions in clinical settings. Moral values
are based on various sources such as religion, philosophy, professional codes,
professional associations, family, culture, community, colleagues, and personal
experience. Medical ethics can affect the well-being of patients and even the medical
practioner's professional and personal lives. Medical professionals have to deal with
daily ethical dilemma in clinical settings because the community relies on critical
decisions made in time, which sometimes have far-reaching consequences.
Moral Principles in Medical Technology Ethics
Autonomy. This principle dictates that the patient has the right to refuse or choose
their treatment.
Beneficence. This principle indicates that a practitioner should act in the best interest of
the patient.
Nonmaleficence. This principle provides that evil or harm should not be inflicted either
on oneself or on others.
Justice. This principle is concerned with the distribution of scarce health resources and
the decision on who gets what treatment in terms of fairness and equality.
Respect for Dignity. This principle provides for all the necessary means of care, high
regard for the person or the patient, and needed information to make a relevant
decision.
Truthfulness and Honesty. This is simply the dedication of a person to his job and is
reflective of being honest and concerned.
Stewardship. This principle refers to the expression of one's responsibility to nurture
and cultivate what has been entrusted to him.
VALUES OF A MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIST
A person's beliefs are influenced by one's family, community, society, culture, religion,
and colleagues. These factors shape one's values and behavior. The values of a person
are not constant; they change over time. Aside from the values that are inherent in an
individual, other values can also be developed. An inherent personal value motivates a
person to choose what is good for oneself, and becomes the basis for one's interest in
doing what is right. Personal values are developed from life experiences.
A child who cannot support himself/herself needs the care of the family in order to
survive. A family, which is the basic unit of a society, is governed by unconditional love
and trust that protects the interests of each family member. Because of strong family
ties, family values have strong influence on a person's belief and behavior. Similarly, the
community to which an individual belongs can also shape the cultural values of a
person. It sets the standards that are acceptable in the society which defines the way of
life in the community. American values are different from Asian values; and within Asia,
Korean values are different from Filipino values. When an individual moves to another
country, an adjustment to the cultural values of his new place is needed to get along
with the citizens of that place. People within the community belong to different religious
organizations that have different faith and spirituality. Spiritual values are based on
religious values that emanate from God.
An individual is usually governed by the combination of these values. Conflict between
these values creates problem as one value contradicts another value. The conflict of
values causes confusion on the right thing to do in a particular situation.
The values of an employee are important to keep order within the workplace. A code of
conduct, which defines the expected behavior of an employee, is set within the
workplace. In a professional setting, values and ethics serve as the foundation of an
organization. Within the workplace, professionals have different values, attitudes,
backgrounds and skills, so there is a need for a common work ethic. This is important in
achieving a common goal. Some of the employee's work values are punctuality,
integrity, commitment, honesty, and loyalty.
The practice of medical technology consists of engaging in activities to conduct analysis
and tests in the field of medical biology on the human body or on a specimen, and to
ensure the technical validity of the results for diagnostic or therapeutic follow-up
purposes. A medical technologist is accountable to the patient, to the attending
physician and to the community in general. This means that the medical technologist
takes on the responsibility of providing accurate and reliable test results.
The medical technologist works collaboratively with the medical practitioner in
providing patient care through accurate diagnosis and treatment. The commitment to
provide prompt and professional service is important in efficient healthcare delivery.
Integrity in laboratory management is needed in quality assurance. The medical
technologist review records in compliance with clinical guidelines in specimen
diagnostic assay, and data collection. The obligation the confidentiality of all laboratory
test results and information is a sign of respect to the right of patient for privacy.
The Profession of Medical Technologists
Primarily, medical technologists should carry out their duties conscientiously and take
responsibility for their own actions. A medical technologist obeys the instructions and
directions of the management. However, if it conflicts with the conviction fundamental
principles of the profession, they have the right to turn down work that affects its quality
and control. Being in the profession, they should pay attention to the risk of contagion
hygiene, and the external environment. Medical technologist should keep abreast of the
latest advancements in their field of education and continue enhancing their
professional skills.
As in other medical professions, mistakes in the practice of medical technology are
sometimes inevitable and can lead to ethical dilemmas. In this situation, the medical
technologists’ code of ethics serves as the guidelines for making the appropriate
decision. However, not all medical technologists will arrive at the same decision even
though the same ethical principles are applied. Nevertheless, a high level of integrity
should be maintained in dealing with ethical dilemmas.
Medical Technologists and Patients
Patients' rights include the right to be treated with dignity, the right to self-
determination and the right to not be harmed or hurt. People are entitled to protect
their own identity and individuality. Within the bioethical sphere, the patient has a right
to participate in the decision-making process along with professionals, especially if it
pertains to the patient’s own welfare and condition. It is, therefore, the duty of the
professionals to respect the patient's decision. At the same time, the Medical
technologist should clearly inform the patient possibilities and limitations of the
treatment prescribed aim of explaining the risks in treatment and trials is to gain
cooperation from the patient consent prior to the trials.
Because of the advancements in technology, medical data breach has become a
pressing issue for the medical profession. Confidentiality in the field of medicine is
about protecting the patient's information and medical results. Negligence on the part
of medical technologists to safeguard the security of the patient record will jeopardize
patient privacy. Because of this, lack of trust in the medical field has become a growing
problem in the healthcare system.
Medical Technologists and Their Colleagues
Medical technologists should respect the work of their colleagues and support them
professionally. They must exhibit tolerance toward other professionals work methods
and circumstances. Supportive behavior promotes health and safety in the work
environment.
Medical Technologists and Their Workplace
Ethics are rules and values used in a professional setting. In the workplace, managers
and supervisors set standards or ethics to show respect and honesty as well as to
promote trust. If the team uses unethical forms of communication, the organization
cannot succeed. Ethics are used worldwide in small or large companies, including
hospitals. Ethics in the workplace promotes a sense of worth and trust among
professionals. Medical technologists are expected to make their knowledge available to
other medical technologists, biomedical students, and other members of the healthcare
team. They should be respectful of their responsibility and other professional disciplines
and work toward establishing and building cooperation with other professionals. Thus,
patients will benefit. The medical technologists will also contribute toward improving
public healthcare service as well the utilization of resources. The clients trust that the
services provided by the professionals will benefit them.
Medical Technologists and the Society
Medical technologist should keep themselves informed of the developments and
changes in biomedical and political healthcare legislations. They should also ensure that
all biological materials be disposed in an ethical and environmentally safe manner.
Problems and Concerns in Medical Technology Practice
Negligence
This means failure to act and use reasonable care. Anyone, including nonmedical
persons, can be liable for negligence. Negligence involves carelessness and deviation
from the expected standard of care in a particular set of circumstances.
Malpractice
This is an act of negligence or omission of a healthcare service expected from a
professional healthcare provider in which the care provided deviates from accepted
standards of practice in the medical community and may result in injury or death of the
patient. Malpractice is a more specific term that pertains to both the standard of care
and professional status of the healthcare provider. If the person committing the wrong
deed is a professional, then he or she is liable for malpractice.
In order to prove negligence or malpractice, the following elements must be
established: a duty is owed, which means that a legal duty exists whenever a hospital or
healthcare provider undertakes care or treatment of a patient; a duty was breached,
which means that the healthcare provider failed to conform to the relevant standard of
care; the breach causes an injury, which means that the breach of duty was the
proximate cause of injury; and damages that may be economic (lost earning capacity,
medical expenses, and so on) and noneconomic damages, including physical damage
such as loss of vision, organ, and Limbs and psychological damage such as severe pain
and emotional distress.
Unit 6: MEDICAL TERMINOLOGIES AND ABBREVIATIONS
Introduction
Most medical terms are derived from Greek and Latin words. Since clinical laboratory
personnel are in constant communication with other health care personnel, patients,
and family members on a daily basis, they need to be familiar with the abbreviations
and meanings of common medical terms. This unit includes some of the common
medical terminologies and their meaning,
Also included are the rules on the appropriate letter that comes after a suffix, how to
convert a medical term from its singular form to its plural form.
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this unit, students will be able to:
1. Identify the meaning of the root word, prefixes and suffixes commonly used in
medical
terminologies;
2. Use correctly commonly used prefixes and suffixes;
3. Define meaning of common medical terms used in the practice of medical
technology.
Presentation of Contents
A medical term has three basic parts-the root word, the prefix, and the suffix. The root
word is the main part of the medical term that denotes the meaning of the word.
Examples: colo - colon
hemat – blood
phlebo - vein
aero - air
The prefix is found at the beginning of the term and it shows how meaning is
assigned to the word.
Examples:
a-/an--without, absence
hyper-- meaning increased/above
poly-- many pre—before
On the other hand, the suffix is found at the terminal portion or at the end of the
term. It also denotes the meaning to the root word.
Examples: -megaly - enlargement
-emia -blood
-uria - urine
-ostomy - to make an opening or mouth
It is a rule that if the suffix starts with a consonant, a combining vowel needs to
be used (usually the letter O). The combining vowel does not change the meaning of the
root word and is added in order to make the pronunciation of the word easier. The
combining vowel is added between the root word and the suffix. Examples:
hemat + logy = hematology - study of blood
phlebo + tomy - phlebotomy - the process of cutting into the vein using a needle.
The plural form of medical terms is made by changing the end of the word and
not by simply adding S, which follows the rule for irregular nouns.
Examples:
bacterium bacteria
nucleus nuclei
thrombus thrombi
bacillus bacilli
Root Words
cardio = heart myo = muscle arterio = arterys cyto = cell
arthro = joint
heap/hepato = liver pyo = pus cranio = skull
pyro = fever nephro = kidney
osteo = bone
Prefixes
iso- = same micro- = small macro- = large intra- = inside/within
pseudo- = false
anaero- = without oxygen mono- = one
homo- = same, like nano- = billionth
cryo- = cold hypo- = decreased logamning neo-= new
Suffixes
-itis = inflammation of -megaly = enlargement -blast = young -cidal = killing of
-poiesis = formation
pathy = disease -meter = measure -penia = deficiency -ectomy = surgical removal oma
= tumor
-emia = blood condition to -tome = cutting instrument
Abbreviations
Listed below are the commonly encountered abbreviations in the health care practice
that medical technology students should know:
DOH - Department of Health
CHED - Commission on Higher Education
VDRL - Venereal Disease Research Laboratories
AIDS - Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome
AIDs - Autoimmune disorders/diseases
AMI - Acute Myocardial Infarction
BUN - Blood Urea Nitrogen
2PPBS - 2 hours Postprandial Blood Sugar
AFS - Acid Fast Stain
PCQACL - Philippine Council for Quality Assurance in the Clinical Laboratories
FBS - Fasting Blood Sugar
IV - Intravenous
HIV - Human Immunodeficiency Virus
IU - International Unit
ICU - Intensive Care Unit
K - Potassium
Na - Sodium
NPO- Nothing Per Orem
BAP - Blood Agar Plate
Unit 7: LABORATORY BIOSAFETY AND BIOSECURITY
Good biosafety, laboratory biosecurity and biocontainment practices are fundamental to
public health. Perhaps the failure to follow appropriate biosafety and laboratory
biosecurity practices may still be the greatest threat for the reappearance of SARS.
Likewise, biosafety, laboratory biosecurity and biocontainment practices are crucial for
the safekeeping of poliovirus within laboratories as laboratories and culture collections
become the only repositories of the wild poliovirus. The continuing implementation of
appropriate biosafety, laboratory biosecurity and biocontainment practices is essential
to prevent the release of variola viruses from the two custodial repositories (CDC,
Atlanta, GA, USA, and VECTOR, Koltsovo, Novosibirsk Region, Russian Federation),
where research on these viruses is carried out.
Responsible laboratory practices, including protection, control and accountability for
valuable biological materials will help prevent their unauthorized access, loss, theft,
misuse, diversion or intentional release, and contribute to preserving scientifically
important work for future generations.
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this unit, students will be able to:
1. Discuss the history and the related policies and guidelines governing laboratory
biosafety and biosecurity.
2. Classify microorganisms according to risk group.
3. Categorize laboratories according to biosafety level.
Presentation of Contents
Brief History of Laboratory Biosafety
Observing and implementing laboratory safety precautions are of utmost
importance in the medical technology practice. Individuals who handle and process
microbiological specimen are vulnerable to pathogenic microorganisms which are
possible sources of laboratory acquired infections (LAI).
Laboratory biosafety and biosecurity traces its history in North America and
Western Europe. The origins of biosafety is rooted in the US biological weapons
program which began in 1943, as ordered by then US President Franklin Roosevelt and
was active during the Cold War. It was eventually terminated by US President Richard
Nixon in 1969. In 1943, Ira L. Baldwin became the first scientific director of Camp Detrick
(which eventually became Fort Detrick), and was tasked with establishing the biological
weapons program for defensive purposes to enable the United States to respond if
attacked by such weapons. After the Second World War, Camp Detrick was designated a
permanent installation for biological research and development. Biosafety was an
inherent component of biological weapons development. Later on, Newell A. Johnson
designed modifications for biosafety at Camp Derrick. He engaged some of Camp
Detrick's leading scientists about the nature of their work, and developed specific
technical solutions such as Class III safety cabinets and laminar flow hoods to address
specific risks. Consequent meetings eventually led to the formation of the American
Biological Safety Association (ABSA) in 1984. The association held annual meetings that
soon became the ABSA annual conferences (Salerno et al., 2015).
Other contributors outside the United States included Arnold Wedum who
described the use of mechanical pipettors to prevent laboratory-acquired infections in
1907 and 1908 (Kruse (1991), cited by Salerno, 2015). Moreover, ventilated cabinets,
early progenitors to the nearly ubiquitous engineered control now known as the
biological safety cabinet, were also first documented outside of the US biological
weapons program. In 1909, a pharmaceutical company in Pennsylvania developed a
ventilated cabinet to prevent infection from mycobacterium tuberculosis.
At the height of increasing mortality and morbidity due to smallpox in 1967,
WHO aggressively pursued the eradication of the virus (College of Physicians of
Philadelphia 2014). It was also during this time that serious concerns about biosafety
practices worldwide were raised, contributing directly to the decision of the World
Health Assembly to consolidate the remaining virus stocks into two locations: the Center
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the United States and the State Research
Center of Virology and Biotechnology VECTOR (SRCVB VECTOR) in Russia. In 1974, the
CDC published the Classification of Etiological Agents on the Basis of Hazard, that
introduced the concept of establishing ascending levels of containment associated with
risks in handling groups of infectious microorganisms that present similar
characteristics. Two years later, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) of the United
States published the NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA
Molecules. It explained in detail the microbiological practices, equipment, and facility
necessarily corresponding to four ascending levels of physical containment.
These guidelines laid the foundation for the introduction of a code of biosafety
practice. The code, along with WHO's first edition of Laboratory Biosafety Manual (1983)
and the NIH's jointly-published first edition of the Biosafety in Microbiological and
Biomedical Laboratories (1984), marked the development of the practice of laboratory
biosafety These documents established the model of biosafety containment levels with
certain agents which increased the biosafety levels for biological agents that pose risks
to human health. Bi levels are the technical means of mitigating the risk of accidental
infection from or of agents in the laboratory setting as well as the community and
environment it is sit in. Although biosafety levels are concentrated in a combination of
engineered con administrative controls, and practices, the emphasis is clearly on the
equipment and facility controls, with little attention given to risk assessment.
This progress in biosafety practice continued until the emergence of a
community of "biosafety officers" who adopted the administrative role of ensuring that
the proper equipment and facility controls are in place based on the specified biosafety
level of the laboratory.
Arnold Wedum, director of Industrial Health and Safety at the US Army
Biological Research Laboratories in 1944, was recognized as one of the pioneers of
biosafety that provided the foundation for evaluating the risks of handling infectious
microorganisms and for recognizing biological hazards and developing practices,
equipment, and facility safeguards for their control. In 1966, Wedum and microbiologist
Morton Reitman, colleagues at Fort Detrick, analyzed multiple epidemiological studies
of laboratory-based outbreaks.
Brief History of Laboratory Biosecurity
In 1996, the US government enacted the Select Agent Regulations to monitor
the transfer of a select list of biological agents from one facility to another. Slightly after
the terrorist attacks and the anthrax attacks of 2001, also known as Amerithrax, the US
government changed its perspective. The revised Select Agent Regulations then
required specific security measures for any facility in the United States that used or
stored one or more agents on the new, longer list of agents.
The revision of the Select Agent Regulations in 2012 sought to address the
creation of two tiers of select agents. Tier 1 agents are materials that pose the greatest
risk of deliberate misuse, and the remaining select agents. This change was intended to
make the regulations more risk-based, mandating additional security measures for Tier
1 agents. Other countries also relatively implemented and prescribed biosecurity
regulations for bioscience facilities. Singapore's Biological Agents and Toxins Act is
similar in scope with the US regulations but with more severe penalties for
noncompliance (Republic of Singapore 2005). In South Korea, the Act on Prevention of
Infectious Diseases in 2005 was amended to require institutions that work with listed
"highly dangerous pathogens” to implement laboratory biosafety and biosecurity
requirements to prevent the loss, theft, diversion, release, or misuse of these agents. In
Japan, the Infectious Disease Control Law was recently amended under Japan's Ministry
of Health, Labor, and Welfare. It also established four schedules of select agents that are
subject to different reporting and handling requirements for possession, transport, and
other activities. Then in Canada, Canadian containment level (CL) 3 and CL4 facilities
that work with risk group 3 or 4 are required to undergo certification. In 2008, the
Danish Parliament passed a law that gives the Minister of Health and Prevention the
authority to regulate the possession, manufacture, use, storage, sale, purchase or other
transfer, distribution, transport, and disposal of listed biological agents. Around the
world, biosecurity implementation has become a purely administrative activity based on
a government developed checklist.
Local and International Guidelines on Laboratory Biosafety and Biosecurity
In February 2008, the Comité Européen de Normalisation (CEN), a European
Committee for Standardization published the CEN Workshop Agreement 15793 (CWA
15793) which focuses on laboratory biorisk management. The Workshop offers a
mechanism where stakeholders can develop consensus standards and requirements in
an open process. The CW 15793 can be applied to international stakeholders, however,
they do not have the force of regulation while conformity is voluntary. The CWA 15793
was developed among experts from 24 different countries including Argentina, Australia,
Belgium, Canada, China, Denmark, Germany, Ghana, UK, US, among others. It was
updated in 2011 and intended to maintain a biorisk management system among diverse
organizations and set out performance-based requirements with the exclusion of
guidance for implementing a national biosafety system. Since it originated in the
European workshop agreement framework, confusion among countries outside Europe
arose especially in the United States in terms of its applicability. Nevertheless, the
agreement was used until it officially expired in 2014 (Gronvall, 2015).
To address concerns on biosafety guidance for research and health laboratories,
issues on risk assessment and guidance to commission and certify laboratories, the
WHO in 1983 published its 3rd edition of the Laboratory Biosafety Manual. It includes
information on the different levels of containment laboratories (Biosafety levels 1-4),
different types of biological safety cabinets, good microbiological techniques, and how
to disinfect and sterilize equipment. In terms of biosecurity, it covers the packaging
required by international transport regulations and other types of safety procedures for
chemical, electrical, ionizing radiation, and fire hazards. The manual puts emphasis on
the continuous monitoring and improvement directed by a biosafety officer and the
biosafety committee. Unfortunately, there is no mechanism to ensure that the WHO
biosafety guidance is being adhered to, or that people working in laboratories are
sufficiently trained.
The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB), made effective in 2003 which applies
to the 168 member-countries provides an international regulatory framework to ensure
"an adequate level of protection in the field of safe transfer, handling, and use of living
modified organisms (LMOs) resulting from modern biotechnology." The regulations
primarily tackle the safe transfer, handling, and use of LMOs that may have adverse
effects on the conservation of biological diversity except those that are used for
pharmaceuticals purposes. In addition legislation provides a framework for assessing the
risk of LMOs and is focused on that LMOs do not negatively affect biodiversity.
The new National Committee on Biosafety of the Philippines (NCBP) established
E.O. 430 series of 1990 was formed on the advocacy efforts of scientists. The man NCPB
focuses on the organizational structure for biosafety: procedures for evaluating
proposals with biosafety concerns; procedures and guidelines on the introduction, move
and field release of regulated materials, and procedures on physico-chemical and
biological containment. On March 17, 2006, the Office of the President promulgated E.O
establishing the National Biosafety Framework (NBF), which prescribes the guidelines for
implementation, strengthening the National Committee on Biosafety of the Philippines
NBF is a combination of policy, legal, administrative, and technical instruments
developed attain the objective of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety which the
Philippines signed on May 24, 2000. The NBF can be considered as an expansion of the
NCBP, which since 1989 has played an important role in pioneering the establishment
and development of the current biosafety system of the country and was acknowledged
as a model system for developing countries. The Department of Agriculture (DA) also
issued Administrative Order No. 8 t set in place policies on the importation and release
of plants and plant products derived from modern biotechnology. The Department of
Health (DOH), together with NCBP, formulated guidelines in the assessment of the
impacts on health posed by modern biotechnology and its applications. The guidelines
aid in evaluating and monitoring processed food derived from or containing GMO.
Currently, DOH, in the midst of technological advances, recognizes the need to update
the minimum standards and technical requirements for clinical laboratories. It requires
clinical laboratories to ensure policy guidelines on laboratory biosafety and biosecurity
(DOH Administrative Order No. 2007-0027).
Different Organizations in the field of Biosafety
Several organizations across continents have undertaken initiatives in advocating
for laboratory biosafety and biosecurity. The following are some prominent
organizations inside and outside the Philippines:
1. American Biological Safety Association (ABSA) a regional professional society for
biosafety and biosecurity founded in 1984. It promotes biosafety as a scientific O
discipline and provides guidance to its members on the regulatory regime present in
North America.
2. Asia-Pacific Biosafety Association (A-PBA) a group founded in 2005 that acts as a
professional society for biosafety professionals in the Asia-Pacific region. Its members E
are from Singapore, Brunei, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines, and
Myanmar. Active members of the International Biosafety Working Group are be required
to directly contribute to the development of the best biosafety practices.
3. European Biological Safety Association (EBSA) a non-profit organization to in June
1996, that aims to provide a forum for discussions and debates on issue sent those
working in the field of biosafety. EBSA focuses on encouraging and communicating
among its member’s information and issues biosafety and biosecurity as well as
emerging legislation and standards.
4. Philippine Biosafety and Biosecurity Association (PhBBA) created by a multi-
disciplinary team with members coming from the health and education sector's as well
as individuals from the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government. Also
included are members of the steering committee and technical working groups of the
National Laboratory Biosafety and Biosecurity Action Task Force established as per DPO
No. 2006-2500 dated September 15, 2006. A long term goal of the association is to
assist the DA and DOH in their efforts to create a national policy and implement plan for
laboratory biosafety and biosecurity.
5. Biological Risk Association Philippines (BRAP) a non-government and non-profit
association that works to serve the emergent concerns of biological risk management in
various professional fields such as in the health, agriculture, and technology sectors
throughout the country. It has launched numerous activities in cooperation and
collaboration with other associations, on a national and international scale in the
promotion of biosafety, biosecurity, admittance to authorized personnel only and
biorisk management as scientific disciplines. BRAP goes by the tagline, "assess, mitigate,
monitor."
Currently, member countries of ABSA, A-PBA, and EBSA have founded
organizations in their respective nations which share the same goals and objectives in
addressing issues and concerns related to biosafety and sign for laboratory doors
biosecurity.
Fundamental Concepts of Laboratory Biosafety and Biosecurity
WHO issued a common understanding of biosafety derived from the practical
guidance on techniques to be used in laboratories. Biosafety has long been practiced in
most nations especially among institutions that handle and process microbiological
specimen. The WHO Laboratory Biosafety Manual (LBM) defines biosafety as "the
containment principles, technologies, and practices that are implemented to prevent
unintentional exposure to pathogens and toxins, or their accidental release." On the
other hand, biosecurity refers to "the protection, control, and accountability for valuable
biological materials laboratories, in order to prevent their unauthorized access, loss,
theft, misuse, diversion or intentional release" (WHO, 2006). By simple definition,
"biosafety protects people for germs" while "biosecurity protects germs from people."
In 1966, Charles Baldwin, an environmental health engineer working for the Dow
Chemical Company containment systems products, created the biohazard symbol used
labeling biological materials carrying significant health risks.
Biosafety and biosecurity share common perspectives in terms of risk assessment
and management methodologies, personnel expertise and responsibility, control and
accountability for research materials including microorganisms and culture stocks,
access control elements, material transfer documentation, training, emergency planning,
and program management among others.
To sum up, biosafety focuses on laboratory procedures and practices necessary
to prevent exposure to and acquisition of infections while the maintenance of secure
procedures and practices in handling biological materials and sensitive information falls
under biosecurity.
Classifications of Microorganisms According to Risk Groups
WHO recommends an agent risk group classification for laboratory use that
describes four general risk groups based on principal characteristics and relative hazards
posed by infectious toxins or agents. Risk group classification for humans and animals is
based on the agent's pathogenicity, mode of transmission, host range, and the
availability of preventative measures and effective treatment. Through the classification,
infective microorganisms are classified as Risk Group 1, Risk Group 2, Risk Group 3, and
Risk Group 4:
1. Risk group 1 - includes microorganisms that are unlikely to cause human or animal
disease. These microorganisms bring about low individual and community risk.
2. Risk group 2 - includes microorganisms that are unlikely to be a significant risk to
laboratory workers and the community, livestock, or the environment. Laboratory
exposure may cause infection, however, effective treatment and preventive measures
are available while the risk of spread is limited. This risk group bring about moderate
individual risk and limited community risk.
3. Risk group 3 - includes microorganisms that are known to cause serious diseases
to humans or animals and may present a significant risk to laboratory workers. It could
present a limited to moderate risk if these microorganisms spread in the community or
the environment, but there are usually effective preventive measures or treatment
available. They bring about high individual risk, and limited to moderate community risk.
4. Risk group 4 - includes microorganisms that are known to produce life-
threatening diseases to humans or animals. It represents a significant risk to laboratory
workers and may be readily transmissible from one individual to another while effective
treatment and preventive measures are not usually available. In effect, they bring about
high individual and community risk.
Categories of Laboratory Biosafety According to Levels
In order to facilitate precautionary measures, CDC categorized laboratories into
four biosafety levels-Biosafety Level 1, Biosafety Level 2, Biosafety Level 3, and Biosafety
Level 4. Biosafety level designations are based on a composite of the design features,
construction, containment facilities, equipment, practices, and operational procedures
required for working with agents from the various risk groups. They are designated in
ascending order, by degree of protection provided to the personnel, the environment,
and the community (BMBL, 5th edition).
1. Biosafety Level 1 (BSL-1) is suitable for work involving viable microorganisms that
are defined and with well-characterized strains known not to cause disease in humans.
Examples of microorganisms being handled in this level are Bacillus subtilis, Naegleria
gruberi, infectious canine hepatitis virus, and exempt organisms under the NIH
Guidelines. This level is the most appropriate among undergraduate and secondary
educational training and teaching laboratories that require basic laboratory safety
practices, safety equipment, and facility design that requires basic level of containment.
2. Biosafety Level 2 (BSL-2) is basically designed for laboratories that deal with
indigenous moderate-risk agents present in the community. It observes practices,
equipment, and facility design that are applicable to clinical, diagnostic, and teaching
laboratories consequently observing good microbiological techniques. Examples of
microorganisms that could be handled under this level are Hepatitis B virus, HIV,
salmonellae, and Toxoplasma species. BSL-2 is appropriate when work is done with
human blood, body fluids, tissues, or primary human cell lines where there is uncertain
presence of infectious agents. Hand washing sinks and waste decontamination facilities
must be available and access to the laboratory must be restricted when work is being
conducted. All procedures where infectious aerosols or splashes may be created are
conducted in biosafety cabinets or other physical containment equipment.
3. Biosafety Level 3 (BSL-3) puts emphasis on primary and secondary barriers in the
protection of the personnel, the community, and the environment from infectious
aerosol exposure. Work with indigenous or exotic agents with a potential for respiratory
transmission, and that may cause serious and potentially lethal infection are being
conducted here. Examples of microorganisms handled here are Mycobacterium
tuberculosis, St. Louis encephalitis virus, and Coxiella. All laboratory activities are
required to be performed in a biosafety cabinet or other containment equipment like a
gas-tight aerosol generation chamber. Secondary barriers for this level are highly
required including controlled access to the laboratory and vent requirements to
minimize the release of infectious aerosols from the laboratory while special engineering
and design features are being considered. Personnel must be supervised by scientists
competent in handling infectious agents and associated procedures in a BSL-3
laboratory.
4. Biosafety Level 4 (BSL-4) is required for work with dangerous and exotic agent
that pose high individual risks of life-threatening diseases that may be transmit via the
aerosol route, for which there are no available vaccines or treatment. Specific practices,
safety equipment, and appropriate facility design and construction are required for
instance when manipulating viruses such as the Marburg or the Crimean-Congo
hemorrhagic fever and any other agents known to pose a high riel of exposure and
infection to laboratory personnel, community, and environment The laboratory worker's
complete isolation from aerosolized infectious material is accomplished primarily by
working in a Class III biosafety cabinet or in a full. Body, air-supplied positive-pressure
personnel suit. A BSL-4 laboratory is generally a separate building or completely isolated
zone with specialized ventilation requirements and waste management systems.
Laboratory staff must have specific and thorough training in handling extremely
hazardous infectious agents. The laboratory is controlled by the laboratory supervisor in
accordance with institutional policies.
Unit 8: BIORISK MANAGEMENT
In working with infectious agents and toxins in laboratories, one must consider the
practices and procedures on biocontainment to ensure biosafety and biosecurity. Proper
management is necessary to carry out total safety of laboratory workers and patients.
Biorisk is the risk associated to biological toxins or infectious agents. The source of risk
may be unintentional exposure to unauthorized access, accidental release or loss, theft,
misuse, diversion, or intentional unauthorized release of biohazards. Biorisk
management is the integration of biosafety and biosecurity to manage risks when
working with biological toxins and infectious agents (CWA 15793 Laboratory Biorisk
Management Standard).
According to the CEN Workshop Agreement (CWA) 15793:2011, Biorisk Management
(BRM) is “a system or process to control safety and security risks associated with the
handling or storage and disposal of biological agents and toxins in laboratories and
facilities.” BRM encompasses the identification, understanding, and management
aspects of a system in interrelated processes. It is divided into three primary
components: assessment (A), mitigation (M), and performance (P). These components
are collectively captured by what is called the AMP model (World Health Organization,
2010). The model requires that control measures be based on a robust risk assessment,
and a continuous evaluation of effectiveness and suitability of the control measures.
Identified risks can be either mitigated, avoided, limited, transferred to an outside entity,
or accepted.
Like a three-legged stool, a biorisk management system fails if one of the components,
or legs, is overlooked or is not addressed. In contrast to other risk management models,
which typically focus heavily on mitigation measures, AMP focuses on all components
with equal attention.
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this unit, students will be able to:
1. Explain the importance of biorisk management.
2. Discuss the AMP model.
3. Explain the procedures on Risk Assessment.
4. Enumerate the different mitigation procedures.
5. Discuss the procedures on performance evaluation.
Presentation of Contents
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this unit, students will be able to:
1. Discuss the importance of proper waste management in healthcare facilities.
2. Discuss the proper identification, segregation, collection, storage, transport,
treatment and disposal of healthcare wastes.
Presentation of Contents
Defining Health Care Wastes
Health care wastes refer to all solid or liquid wastes generated by any of the following
activities:
1. diagnosis, treatment, and immunization of humans;
2. research pertaining to diagnosis, treatment, and immunization of humans;
3. research using laboratory animals geared towards improvement of human health;
4. production and testing of biological products; and
5. other activities performed by a health care facility that generates wastes.
According to WHO, between 75 and 90 percent of wastes generated by health care
activities on average are non-hazardous. The remaining 10 to 25 percent is considered
hazardous and may be infectious, toxic, or radioactive. High-income countries typically
generating larger volumes of health care wastes produce 0.5 kg of hazardous waste per
hospital bed per day while low-income countries generate 0.2 kg on average. However,
proper segregation of hazardous and non-hazardous wastes in low-income countries
tends to be less implemented, thus making the real quantity of hazardous wastes much
higher. In the Philippines, 30.37 percent of wastes from health care facilities are
hazardous while the remaining 69.63 percent are general wastes. Philippine hospitals
generate an average of 0.34 kg of infectious sharps and pathological wastes and 0.39 kg
of general wastes per bed per day.
All health care facilities, institutions, business establishments, and other spaces where
health care services are offered with activities or work processes that generate health
care wastes are called health care waste generators. These include
1. hospitals and medical centers
2. infirmaries
3. birthing homes
4. clinics and other health-related facilities
a. Medical
b. ambulatory
c. dialysis
d. health care centers and dispensaries
e. surgical
f. alternative medicine
g. dental
h . veterinary
5. laboratories and research centers
a. medical and biomedical laboratories
b. medical research centers
c. blood banks and blood collection services
d. dental prosthetic laboratories
e. nuclear medicine laboratories
f. biotechnology laboratories
g. animal research and testing
h. drug testing laboratories
i. HIV testing laboratories
6. drug manufacturers
7. institutions
a. drug rehabilitation centers
b. training centers for embalmers.
c. medical technology internship training centers
d. schools of Radiologic Technology
e. medical schools
f. nursing homes
g. dental schools
Categories of Health Care Wastes
Health care wastes generated by health care facilities are categorized into seven:
infectious waste, pathological and anatomical waste, sharps, chemical waste,
pharmaceutical waste, radioactive waste, and non-hazardous or general waste.
1. Infectious Waste refers to all wastes suspected to contain pathogens or toxins in
sufficient concentration that may cause disease to a susceptible host. It includes
discarded materials or equipment used for diagnosis, treatment, and management of
patients with infectious diseases. Examples include discarded microbial cultures, solid
wastes with infections such as dressings, sputum cups, urine containers, and blood bags,
liquid wastes with infections such as blood, urine, vomitus, and other body secretions,
and food wastes (liquid or solid) coming from patients with highly infectious diseases.
2. Pathological and Anatomical Waste refers to tissue sections and body fluids or
organs derived from biopsies, autopsies, or surgical procedures sent to the laboratory
for examination. Examples include internal organs and tissues used for histopathological
examinations. Anatomical waste is a subgroup of pathological waste that refers to
recognizable body parts usually from amputation procedures.
3. Sharps refer to waste items that can cause cuts, pricks, or puncture wounds. They are
considered the most dangerous health care waste because of their potential to cause
both injury and infection. Examples include used syringes in phlebotomy, blood lancets,
surgical knives, and broken glasswares.
4. Chemical Waste refers to discarded chemicals (solid, liquid, or gaseous) generated
during disinfection and sterilization procedures. It also includes wastes with high
content of heavy metals and their derivatives. Common examples of this type of waste
are laboratory reagents, X-ray film developing solutions, disinfectants and soaking
solutions, used batteries, concentrated ammonia solutions, concentrated hydrogen
peroxide, chlorine, and mercury from broken thermometers and sphygmomanometers.
Chemicals are considered hazardous when they are:
The disposal of untreated health care wastes in landfills can lead to the
contamination of drinking, surface, and ground waters if those landfills are
not properly constructed.
The treatment of health care wastes with chemical disinfectants can result
in the release of chemical substances into the environment if those
substances are not handled, stored, and disposed in an environmentally-
sound manner.
Incineration of waste is widely practiced, but inadequate incineration or
the incineration of unsuitable materials results in the release of pollutants into
the air and in the generation of ash residue. Incinerated materials containing
or treated with chlorine can generate dioxins and furans, which are human
carcinogens and have been associated with a range of adverse health effects.
Incineration of heavy metals or materials with high metal content in particular
lead, mercury, and cadmium) can lead to the spread of toxic metals in the
environment.
Only modern incinerators operating at 850°C to 1100°C and fitted with
special gas cleaning equipment are able to comply with the international
emission standards for dioxins and furans. It should be noted that disposal of
health care wastes by incineration is not allowed in the Philippines.
Alternatives to incineration such as autoclaving, microwaving, and steam
treatment integrated with internal mixing, which minimize the formation and
release of The chemicals or hazardous emissions should be given
consideration in settings where there are sufficient resources to operate and
maintain such systems and disposal of Be the treated waste.
The following are the benefits achieved through proper and strict compliance with
standards on the management of health care wastes: