re: Why do hospital workers feel it's OK to wear scrubs to a restaurant?

quote:

---

Question 3: Would potential contact of textiles, such as linen or laundry, with unknown body fluids in medical or dental settings where universal precautions are practiced trigger coverage under OSHA's Bloodborne Pathogens Standard at that medical or dental facility? Also, would the contaminated textiles require special handling under the Bloodborne Pathogens Standard?

Reply 3: Pursuant to 29 CFR 1910.1030(a), the Bloodborne Pathogens standard is applicable to all occupational exposure to blood or other potentially infectious material (OPIM), as defined in 29 CFR 1910.1030(b). The definition of OPIM includes saliva in dental procedures, among other things. Occupational exposure is defined as "reasonably anticipated skin, eye, mucous membrane, or parenteral contact with blood or other potentially infectious materials that may result from the performance of an employee's duties." A determination of the duties, tasks, and scope of the employees' work must be done by the employer to assess whether employees have reasonably anticipated exposure to blood or OPIM [29 CFR 1910.1030(c)(2)]. Employers with employees who launder or otherwise handle linen contaminated with blood or OPIM (e.g., housekeeping staff in a healthcare setting; employees in a commercial laundry facility with a contract to launder contaminated linen from medical/dental settings) would be considered to have reasonably anticipated exposure and would be covered by the standard. Blood is often found on linen and laundry in medical facilities, and saliva is often found on such materials in dental offices. With respect to unknown fluids, 29 CFR 1910.1030(d)(1) provides in pertinent part: "Under circumstances in which differentiation between body fluid types is difficult or impossible, all body fluids shall be considered potentially infectious materials." The fact that the contaminated textiles are in a medical or dental facility where universal precautions are practiced would not preclude coverage under the Bloodborne Pathogens Standard.

---