Hi,Im writing this for a friend whom needs advice on this matter.Is it ok to incorperate a COSHH policy onto and infection control policy? or do we need to have seperate policies for a medical GP practice?

Sorry really don't see the relationship between controlling the unknown pathogen / outcome (infection control) and the known (COSHH) used material / exposure minimisation. If you take COSHH to the level of controlling for example ebola which a patient could present with ?

How many COSHH policies actually include body fluid kits etc. from First Aid activity. How many organisations have truly adequate arrangements for the disposal of contaminated body fluid kits (rather than throwing them in the bin or letting the sanitary towel collector take them), How many in education don't dump "the pink stuff" after use in the general waste. Agree with the concept of COSHH but taking the execution in to areas where the employer does not deliberately introduce a known means all employers would be expected to address too many unknowns in their plans. From personal experience my GP introduced touch screen appointment attendance and provided a sanitiser which over time ran out and it appeared to be no one's duty to check and re-fill. Not wishing to touch a potentially contaminated surface I remain stubbornly old fashioned and speak to the receptionist potentially exposing them to airborne transmittable illness. Is the practice as employer in breach of the COSHH Regulations in such a scenario? Their infection control policy is certainly wanting given the touch screen was introduced as a control to protect the receptionist.

Mine links to, infectious disease policy so I have two serparate policies but I suppose it depends on the area of work.

My point was that the COSHH regulations cover hazardous substances including biological agents (pathogenic micro-organisms) and they contain a schedule of special provisions relating to biological agents. COSHH, together with the associated Approved Codes of Practice (ACOPs), require employers to assess the risks of exposure to biological agents (micro-organisms) and either prevent exposure (where reasonably practicable) or control it adequately (HSE web page). Roundtuit; if your GP identified a risk and a suitable control measure, and then failed to maintain that control measure that is a different subject altogether.

There is this notion that as COSHH is its own set of regulations you always need a separate COSHH risk assessment. In fact for most circumstances you don’t. So for example I can’t see the point of filling in a COSHH form just because your office happens to use correction fluid; you can just include that hazard as part of the general office risk assessment. If of course the hazard is particularly significant for example in a lab working with Anthrax let’s say then I would expect have a separate assessment dealing with that risk rather than have it included in something dealing primarily with general workplace issues. Remember the risk assessment has to be suitable and sufficient An infection control policy should be based on a risk assessment which is suitable and sufficient. It does not matter where it is called a COSHH assessment or not. That only becomes relevant when it goes wrong and they (HSE?) decide to prosecute under COSHH rather than some other legislation.