Authors: (including presenting author): :
Chan MW(1) Chan YK(2), Lo KF(1), Mak TH(1), Wong MYA(1)
Affiliation: :
(1)Occupational Therapy Department, (2) Medicine & Geriatrics Department, Ruttonjee and Tang Shiu Kin Hospitals
Keyword 1: :
3D Printing Technology
Keyword 2: :
Occupational Safety and Health
Keyword 3: :
Laser Hazard
Introduction: :
Barcode scanning is essential in In-Patient Medication Order Entry (IPMOE) systems for accurate medication verification. Although Class 2 laser scanners (≤1 mW) are generally regarded safe due to the blink reflex, repeated or prolonged close-range exposure may still pose ocular hazards. The acrylic laser shields at RTSKH require replacement due to wear, and procurement delays raised safety concerns. In August 2023, the Occupational Therapy and Medicine & Geriatrics wards collaborated to design a compact and cost-effective 3D-printed shield, EyeGuard 3D. By October 2025, 46 units had been deployed across seven wards, improving safety and increasing efficiency in replacement processes.
Objectives: :
This study evaluates the effectiveness of EyeGuard 3D regarding durability, user satisfaction, unit cost, and lead time, compared with conventional acrylic laser shields.
Methodology: :
A comparative analysis was performed using four methods. (1) Durability test shows the number of drops required to cause structural failure in both shields after dropping from 1.1metres high. (2) User satisfaction survey invited nursing staff to evaluate EyeGuard 3D’s durability, laser protection, comfort level, ease of installation, and staff compliance. (3) Cost analysis compared the unit costs of the outsourced acrylic shield and the in-house 3D-printed EyeGuard 3D. (4) Lead time analysis compared procurement times for both shields.
Result & Outcome: :
EyeGuard 3D remained structural integrity after 100 drops, whereas acrylic shields failed after two drops. Among the 34 nurses surveyed, 91% reported greater durability, 97% found EyeGuard 3D easy to install and effective in eye protection, and all indicated good compliance with no eye discomfort. EyeGuard 3D reduced production costs by 91.4% ($30 vs. $350), weighed 87.5% less (20g vs. 156g), occupied 89.5% less volume (73cm2 vs. 696cm2) than an acrylic shield, and required a significantly shorter lead time (3 hours vs. 3 days). EyeGuard 3D substantially improves protection for nursing staff during IPMOE barcode scanning by providing superior durability, a lighter and more compact design, lower cost, and faster delivery compared to acrylic shields. Its implementation promotes staff safety, work efficiency, and operational sustainability. Future initiatives will focus on developing an advanced feedback mechanism to facilitate timely replacements and seamless support services.
