PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11760260

Body piercing: issues for A&E nurses.

Abstract

There has been a significant increase in the incidence of body piercing in the Western world over the last decade. Although some A&E nurses have piercings of one type or another themselves, many have no experience of it. When confronted with a patient who has a problem associated with a piercing, there can be difficulties. However, even more anxiety seems to arise in emergency situations, when speed is crucial and health care professionals are unsure about how or when to remove jewelery. This piece reviews literature and takes advice from a professional piercer, regarding issues facing A&E nurses and how they can best be approached. Handling trauma, infection and embedded jewelery is described. Specific detail about piercing of the ear, nose, tongue, nipple, navel and genitals is included. Finally the role of the A&E nurse is identified in: when and how to remove jewelery, aspects of health education and raising awareness among staff.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

L Hadfield-Law. 2001. Body piercing: issues for A&E nurses.. https://doi.org/10.1054/aaen.2000.0203

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Pro bono publico.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Cosmetic Techniques↗

Microresurfacing using the variable-pulse erbium:YAG laser: a comparison of the 0.5- and 4-ms pulse durations.

BACKGROUND: Laser resurfacing has become less popular because of its long recovery time, significant discomfort, and potential risks. Microsurfacing employs the use of single-pass erbium:YAG (Er:YAG) "mini peels," which may be performed serially. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and patient acceptance of microresurfacing Er:YAG peels in treating facial photodamage. The variable-pulse Er:YAG system was used and was allowed a comparison of the 0.5- and 4-ms pulse widths. METHODS: Six female patients underwent eight microresurfacing peels in a split-face fashion using the 0.5- and 4.0-ms pulse durations of a variable-pulse Er:YAG laser. Patients returned at postoperative Days 3 to 4 and 7 for clinical evaluation and Mexameter measurements. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in healing or postoperative erythema between the 0.5- and 4-ms pulse durations on postoperative Day 7. The average time to reepithelialization was 3.6 days. In a 1-year postoperative interview, four of six patients said that they would undergo the peel again periodically, and five of six stated they had maintained some level of improvement. CONCLUSION: Microresurfacing is an effective and well-tolerated procedure. Benefits include its tolerability under topical anesthesia, limited down time, and high patient satisfaction.

Cosmetic Techniques↗