Finger Prick vs. Needle Stick

[SB2008]

My question is more for educational purposes, to help me understand the nature of the virus.  Essentially, I understand that needle-stick injuries are potentially hazardous because the virus is able to live in the blood in a secure, air-tight syringe.  However, what if (again, for purposes of a hypothethetical), a finger ***** (lance) was re-used.  In other words, what if a lab person accidentally re-used a finger *****/lance to conduct the ***** test on another person.   I realize this is against protocol, but hypothetically, if someone with HIV was tested prior to the next person, and the finger ***** was re-used, could they "inject" the next person with the HIV infected blood that was still on the finger *****/lance?  My understanding is that if enough time had passed, since the finger ***** is exposed to air, it would dry out.  This is especially true since the top of the needle is so small, thereby aiding in the drying process.  But would the needle in a finger ***** really be exposed to air?  And if so, would the virus die quickly?  Just trying to understand the difference between a finger-*****/lance and a needle-stick.  Thanks!

[sunsforlife]

That cant be done because those Little finger prik things for the tests are mechanically made to be only used once.

[SB2008]

Again, I realize this is all highly hypothetical and assumes a lot of negligence on the part of the clinic.  However, IF someone did re-use a lancet (assuming it was the kind that could be re-used), wouldn't the small amount of blood on the head of the needle be exposed to air, dry out, and consequently be rendered unable to infect?  I'm assuming those little needles in lances are exposed to air, and assuming enough time passed between re-use, the blood would dry and the virus would die.  Is that right?

[OrionQuest]

Well, he's asking in theory.  Like maybe what if before the lancet or acupuncture needle or whatever accidentally pricks someone else before it is disposed of properly.  I think the risk is still practially nil.

[monkeyflower]

Peek! You've been missed!

Just to stay on topic, I can't imagine anyone in a clinic reusing a lancet, needle, anything like that. Ever. That's pretty basic stuff.

[peekawho]

Many lancets are in a device that retracts them after use, and you physically can't reuse them.  But some aren't.
As the doctor said, in a clinical setting, the risk is extremely rare.  

[Hope29]

some people do reuse them,..they are tiny and made for a machine,..but nurses are taugh to hold them and just "*****" a finger with them,..and poor people do what they do, to save money,...

[Edward W Hook, MD]

The single most infectious bodily fluid for HIV tranmission is blood or blood products.  As a result, exposure to any amount of infected blood carries with it a chance of infection.  The more blood, the more dangerous the exposure.  Most needles are hollow and, as a result, small amounts of blood can be contained within their hollow spaces.  In addition, the nature of needles is that someone could use them more than once.  The lancets used for finger sticks are not hollow and are designed to be only used a single time.  In addition, in settings where lancets are used, there are strict protocols for disposal of the lancets following use.  Putting all of this together, while there is a theoretical chance of HIV transmission with a lancet, it is much, much smaller than for a needle and, in clinical settings, the risk becomes vanishingly rare.

Hope this helps
EWH