Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background

Occupational-related diseases or illnesses account for an estimated 2.4 million deaths worldwide every year. Currently, occupational hazards threaten healthcare workers’ (HCWs) lives, safety, and well-being. Therefore, providing the prevalence and major causes of occupational-related diseases may enable injury reduction and the creation of safer working environments, which are important for providing higher quality services. The current study aimed to determine the prevalence of occupational-related injuries and associated risk factors among HCWs, particularly in developing countries.

Methods

The articles published in English were retrieved using a combination of Boolean logic operators (AND, OR, and NOT), Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), and keywords in electronic databases (SCOPUS/Science Direct, Web of Science, DOAJ, PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Google Scholars). Using Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools, a quality assessment was conducted to determine the articles’ relevance. In addition, the relevant articles were identified through a series of assessment and evaluation stages.

Results

About 721 studies were searched using electronic databases, of which 36 articles included 139,578 HCWs. The average prevalence of occupational-related injuries among HCWs in the career and previous last year accounted for 60.17%, ranged from 32% to 87.8% and 39.16%, ranged from 1.14% to 87%, respectively. The current study found that sex and hours worked, stress at work, occupation, age, training in infection prevention, use of universal precautions, recapping needles, ward work experience, staffing and resource adequacy, awareness, outdated guidelines, and previous exposure to sharp injury were statistically associated with occupational-related injuries.

Conclusions

This study revealed that 39% and 60% of HCWs experienced occupational-related injuries in the last year and during their career, respectively. Therefore, the appropriate measures must be taken to reduce the burden of occupational-related injuries by following standard precautions or occupational health and safety measures.

Keywords

occupational injury occupational health health facility workplace hazards healthcare workers developing country

Introduction

The healthcare sector is among the most unsafe working environments, putting many healthcare providers or workers (HCWs) and other staff members at risk of being exposed to various occupational hazards, such as various biological and nonbiological hazards.^1,2 Currently, occupational hazards threaten HCWs’ lives, safety, and well-being.^1,3,4

According to the International Labour Organization, occupational-related diseases or illnesses accounted for an estimate of 2.4 million of the total estimated deaths each year.⁵ The World Health Organization reported that more than 2 million HCWs are exposed to sharp injuries, including needlestick injuries (NSIs), on a yearly basis.⁶

HCWs experience more than 2 million workplace-related NSIs each year.⁷ Sharp injuries to HCWs resulted in 16,000 cases of hepatitis C virus (HCV), 66,000 cases of hepatitis B virus (HBV), and 1000 cases of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections in 2000.³

Among sharp injuries, NSIs are among the most common occupational-related hazards among HCWs around the world.⁷ The study conducted in 31 countries around the world reported that the last year's worldwide prevalence of NSIs among HCWs was 44.5% (95% CI: 35.7%-53.2%).⁷ Another study conducted in sub-Saharan Africa also revealed that the lifetime and last 12 months prevalence ranged from 22% to 95% and 39% to 91%, respectively.³

Additionally, exposure to blood and other infectious materials as a result of occupational-related accidents may represent a potential threat to HCWs.⁸ Accidents involving contact with blood and other body fluids are attributed to the transmission of about 60 pathogens, of which HBV, HCV, and HIV are highlighted.⁹

Furthermore, the risk of disease transmission from infected to other people as a result of exposure to an injury with sharp materials is estimated to be ranged from 6% to 30% for HBV, 5% to 10% for HCV; and 0.3% for HIV.¹⁰ In general, occupational-related injuries among HCWs have continued to be a major health problem in healthcare facilities.^11–13 Identifying and providing the prevalence and major causes of occupational injuries may enable injury reduction, creation of safer working environments, and reduced turnover and cost, which are important for providing higher quality services.^7,14–16

Despite the major importance of these points, and in spite of various individual studies, there is no accurate evidence on the mean prevalence of sharp injuries, including sharp injuries and other injuries among HCWs, and associated factors, particularly in developing countries. Regarding occupational injuries, existing data are focused on published articles at the national level. Some reviews addressed occupational-related NSI^3,17 but not other sharp injuries. The current study provides the prevalence of occupational-related sharp injuries, including NSI and other injuries. Therefore, the current study aims to determine the prevalence of occupational-related injuries among HCWs working in a health facility and associated risk factors in developing countries.

Materials and Methods

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) criteria were followed for conducting the study.¹⁸

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion criteria: The systematic review includes studies that met the following criteria.

Population: Healthcare workers working in the health facilities regardless of their occupation.

Outcome: Studies reported quantitative results, such as magnitude, frequency, rate, or prevalence of any occupational-related sharp injuries and/or associated risk factors were included in the current study.

Language: Articles written in English language.

Types of included articles: Published articles available in full text and were included in the study.

Location or Region: Studies conducted in developing countries.

Survey period and publication year: Not limited.

Sources of Information

SCOPUS/Science Direct, Web of Science, DOAJ, PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Google Scholars were used for literature searches, using main keywords. The following electronic databases were used: SCOPUS/Science Direct, Web of Science, DOAJ, PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Google Scholars. The Boolean logic operators (“AND, OR, and NOT”), medical subject headings (MeSH), and keywords were used to search the articles from the included databases.

Search Terms and Strategies

The following are the search terms we used by the authors (DD, STT, AAT, WD, and DAM) for searching articles from the electronic databases: prevalence “OR ‘Magnitude’ AND ‘occupational’ OR ‘occupational related’ OR ‘work related’ AND ‘disease’ OR ‘injury’ OR ‘problem’ hazards” AND “healthcare workers” OR “health professional” OR “workers.” The articles were searched using Boolean logic operators (AND, OR, and NOT), Medical Subject Headings, and keywords. The search strategies used for searching the articles from PubMed are available as a supplementary file (Supplemental File I).

Furthermore, the articles were manually searched by the authors (DD, STT, AAT, WD, and DAM) to find those that were difficult to locate and missed from the included electronic databases or not indexed in the included databases. Finally, all of the identified keywords and index terms were cross-checked across the electronic databases that were included. Finally, the reference lists of the included studies were searched for further articles.

Study Selection Process

ENDNOTE software (Thomson Reuters) was used to remove duplicate articles. The PRISMA flowchart was used to guide the study selection process, displaying the publications that were included in the study and those that were excluded from the study with the reason for exclusion. The authors (DD, STT, AAT, WD, and DAM) independently selected the articles based on the titles and abstracts, applying the inclusion criteria. The articles were further read in detail and independently evaluated by the authors (DD, STT, AAT, WD, and DAM). Any disagreements made with respect to the inclusion of studies were resolved by consensus after discussion. Finally, studies that met the criteria were included in this study.

Data Extraction and Quality Assessment

The authors (DD, STT, AAT, WD, and DAM) extracted the data from the eligible articles. The data regarding author(s), year of publication, sample size, study region/country, occupation, and primary outcome (occupational-related sharp injuries, including NSIs and other sharp injuries among HCWs working in the healthcare setting) were extracted from the included studies. The data were extracted from the included articles using Microsoft Excel 2016. The Joanna Briggs Institute tool¹⁹ was used to assess the quality and relevance of the included articles.

The evaluation tools have the following 9 evaluation criteria/parameters: appropriate sampling frame, proper sampling technique, adequate sample size, description of the study subject and setting description, sufficient data analysis, use of valid methods for identifying conditions, valid measurement for all participants, use of appropriate statistical analysis, and adequate response rate. Then, each parameter was evaluated as yes (score = 1) and no (score 0). The quality of the included articles was classified as high (85% and above), moderate (60%-85%), or low (60%). Disagreements made among the authors on what to extract were resolved by discussion after the same processes were repeated.

Results

Study Selection

A total of 721 articles were searched from the included electronic databases (SCOPUS/Science Direct, Web of Science, DOAJ, PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Google Scholars). Then, 189 duplicated articles were excluded. Furthermore, 310 articles were removed after initial screening, and 59 articles were removed after full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Finally, 36 articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Study selection technique or process employed for selecting eligible articles, 2022.

General Characteristics of the Included Studies

In the current study, 139 578 HCWs, ranging from 76 to 61 309 HCWs were included in 33 articles, which were published from 2010 to 2021. Six articles were conducted in China,^20–25 4 in Saud Arabia,^26–28 2 in each India,^28–30 Iran,^31,32 Ethiopia,^33–36 Nigeria,^37,38 and Turkey.^39,40 One study was conducted in each of Ghana,⁴¹ South Africa,⁴² Indonesia,⁴³ Taiwan,⁴⁴ Afghanistan,⁴⁵ Uganda,²⁸ Iraq,⁴⁶ Qatar,⁴⁷ Kenya,⁴⁸ Tanzania,⁴⁹ Korea,⁵⁰ Thailand,¹⁵ Egypt,⁵¹ and Afghanistan.⁴⁵

The mean prevalence of occupational-related injury among HCWs in the last year and career time was 39.16% and 60.17%, respectively. Workload, stress at work, occupation, age, training in infection prevention, use of universal precautions, recapping needles, ward, work experience, staffing and resource adequacy, awareness, outdated guidelines, and previous exposure to sharp injury were statistically associated with occupational related injuries (Table 1).

Table 1.

Characteristics of the Studies That Were Included in the Current Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

References	Sample size	Publication year	Outcomes	Participants	Exposure status	Types of injury	Types of health facility	Country/Region
²⁷	131	2021	87.8% of HCWs were exposed to sharp injuries Nurses (74%) were the most affected HCWS category, followed by doctors (23%) and housekeeping (18%).	Nurse, Doctor, & House-keeper	Career	Sharp injury	Hospital	Saudi Arabia
⁴²	240	2019	There were 93 (38.75%) NSIs among the subjects. NSIs were sustained in nearly two-thirds of cases (64.5%).	Medical service personnel	Career	NSIs	Hospital	South Africa
²⁴	9873	2019	About 39.1% of the nurses reported at least one NSI in the last 12 months The incidence of NSIs was 139.5 per 1000 nurses per year.	Nurses	Past 12 months	NSIs	Hospital	China
⁴⁴	79	2014	56 incidents of NSIs were reported among dentists The incidence rate of NSI accounted for 8.19%/person/years.	Dentists	3-year period	NSI	Hospital	Taiwan
³¹	168	2016	The prevalence of NSIs in career and last year was 76% and 54%, respectively. Sex with an AOR: 0.24 (0.095-0.612) and hours worked/week with AOR: 0.86 (0.812-0.925) were risk factors.	Nurses	Career and last year	NSIs	Hospital	Iran
⁵²	312	2021	In the previous 12 months, nearly 87% of nurses were exposed to NSIs at least once.	Nurses	Last 12 months.	NSIs	Hospital	India
³⁹	555	2019	About 21.6% of nurses experienced an NSSI within the last 12 months	Nurses	Last 12 months.	NSSIs	Hospital	Turkey
²⁸	709	2021	197 (28%) HCWs had sustained percutaneous injuries in the last 12 months	Doctors, nurses, clinical officers	Last 12 months	Percutaneous injuries	Hospital & health center	Uganda
⁴⁶	76	2020	About 52.6% NSIs were reported among HCWs	HCWs	12 months	NSI	Hospital	Iraq
⁴¹	246	2021	The 12-month prevalence of occupational injury was accounted for 29.7%. There were 1.63 injuries per person per year. Workplace stress (AOR: 2.68; 95% CI: 1.26-5.71) and being a laboratory worker were both associated with injury (AOR 3.26; 95% CI: 1.02-10.50).	Doctors, nurses, technician, and auxiliary staff	12-month	Occupational injury	Hospital	Ghana
⁴⁰	249	2020	Syringe needles were the most prevalent piece of NSI equipment (54.6%).	Doctors, nursing, laboratory, & others	Career	NSI	Hospital	Turkey
³⁰	476	2020	A total of 476 injuries were reported by the HCWs who were included in the study. The highest exposure rate (73.7%) was reported in doctors, followed by nurses (19.1%).	Physicians, nurses, Laboratory staff, & others	Not specified	NSI	Hospital	India
⁴⁸	305	2013	Percutaneous injuries were reported by 19% (n = 305) HCWs. Higher rates of percutaneous injuries were observed among nurses (n = 50) HCWs aged below 40 years were more likely to experience percutaneous injuries (OR = 3.7; 95% CI = 1.08-9.13) while previous training in infection prevention was protective (OR = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.03-0.90).	Doctors, clinical officers, nurses, laboratory, mortuary, housekeeper, and students	Last 12 months	Percutaneous injuries	Hospital	Kenya
⁴⁹	436	2015	NSIs were reported by 65.1% (n = 138) of the participants. High rates of NSIs were observed among nurses (71.0%) during procedures (53.6%)	Doctors, nurses, laboratory, and others	12 months	NSI	Hospital	Tanzania
⁵³	193	2017	About 18.7% of the respondents’ encountered needlesticks and sharp injuries in the last year. HCWs who use universal precautions were 99% times less likely to face NSI [AOR = 0.01 (0.002, 0.1)] compared to those who did not use them. HCWs who had acquired the required skill were 96% times less likely to encounter NSI [AOR = 0.04 (0.003-0.57)] than those who did not have. HCWs who had job-related stress were 7.3 times more likely to face NSI [AOR = 7.3 (1.6, 33.2)] than those who did not have job-related stress. HCWs who recap needles were 21.3 times more likely to encounter NSI [AOR = 21.3 (4.4-23)] than those who did not.	Nursing, public health, midwifery, laboratory, & physician	12-month	NSSIs	Hospital and health center	Ethiopia
²⁵	48165	2021	A total of 549 cases of sharp injuries occurred among participants. The incidence of sharp injuries was 1.14% among the participants	Nurse, doctor, Intern, technician, cleaning	12 months	Sharp Injuries	Hospital	China
²⁰	402	2015	A total of 261 (64.9%) nurses reported needlestick or sharp injuries. Syringe needles accounted for the highest proportion of all NSIs (59%), followed by glass items (22%), and trocar core/catheter wires (4%). The prevalence of NSIs was higher for nurses who worked in surgery than for those working in other departments (OR:4.43, 95% CI: 2.30-8.50).	Nurses	Last year	NSSIs	Hospital	China
³²	3806	2017	608 (15.97%) had NSIs over a 5-year period Most of the NSIs were observed in enrolled nurse nursing sisters and midwife group (50.7%) followed by servants (20.1%) and the lowest was found in laboratory staff (2.3%). 72 (11.8%) working in emergency ward and 58 (9.5%) in intensive care unit had NSIs.	Nurse, midwife, anesthesia, physicians, laboratory servants, radiology, secretary, and guard	5 years	NSI	Hospital	Iran
³³	438	2020	The magnitude of NSSIs in the last 12 months was 124 (28.3%) among the study participants. Being male [AOR: 4.25: 95% CI: (2.43-7.41)], having no safety instructions in the work area [AOR:2.27, 95% CI: (1.29-3.97)], having no training on safety [AOR:4.92, 95% CI: (2.75-8.79)], had ≤5 years’ work experience [AOR: 9.0: 95% CI: (4.88-16.60)], recapping of used needles [AOR: 2.63, 95% CI: (1.39-4.99)] were associated with NSSIs	Physicians, nurses, midwives, health officers, laboratory technologists, anesthetist, & cleaners.	Last 12 months	NSSI	Hospital	Ethiopia
⁵⁴	161	2018	53 (32.90%) HCWs had a history of sharps injury. Of which 25 (47.16%) were nurses, 11 (20.76%) were residents, and 6 (11.32%) were dentists.	Nurses, residents, dentists, & housekeeper	6 months and 12 months	Sharp injuries	Hospital	Saudi Arabia
²¹	61309	2019	935 (1.53%) HCWs experienced various types of sharp injuries in one month. Interns experienced the highest proportion of sharp injuries (4.12%). The most common location where sharp injuries occurred in HCWs (36.05%), while disposable syringes were the most common medical devices that caused sharp injuries (32.11%).	Doctors, nurses, logistical workers, medical technicians, and interns.	One month	Sharps injuries	Hospital	China
³⁴	147	2020	The prevalence of needlestick and sharp injuries was 75.5%. Recapping practice of needle (AOR: 3.88; 95% CI: 1.666-9.036), working room (AOR: 2.968; 95% CI: 1.012-8.703), and contagious room like emergency room (AOR: 3.587; 95% CI: 1.383-9.301) are significantly associated with needlestick and sharp injuries.	Midwives and nurses	Career	NSSIs	Hospital	Ethiopia
⁴³	171	2021	Factors associated with the incidence of NSIs were work, career or experience of <5 years (P < .01; [AOR] = 5.04; 95% [CI] = 2.04-12.42), noncompliance with working procedures (P = .01; AOR = 2.47; 95% CI = 1.26-4.82), being female (P = .03; AOR = 2.21; 95% CI = 1.01-4.55), and unsafe workplace conditions (P = .04; AOR = 2.23; 95% CI = 1.01-4.92).	Doctor, nurse/midwife, radiology, laboratory, cleaning staff, and Nursing student	Past 12 months	Risk factors of NSSI	Hospital	Indonesia
³⁵	340	2015	The prevalence of lifetime needlestick and sharp injury was 37.1% The prevalence of injuries within the past one year was 19.1% Participants who practiced needle recapping had higher odds of needlestick and sharp injuries within the past 12 months (AOR = 3.23, 95% CI: 1.78, 5.84) compared to their counterparts.	Nurse, physician, midwife, anesthesia, Health officer, Clinical laboratory, & Janitor	Lifetime & last year	Factor & NSSIs	Hospital	Ethiopia
⁵⁰	3079	2013	About 70.4% of the nurses had experienced needlestick or sharp injuries in the previous year. The risk for NSI significantly decreased as the years working as an RN increased (OR = 0.990, CI = 0.988-0.991). The risk for NSI significantly decreased with the increase in staffing and resource adequacy (OR = 0.794, CI = 0.671-0.940). Safety containers for disposal of sharps and needles (OR = 0.727, CI = 0.580-0.913) significantly decreased the risk for NSIs.	Nurses	Last year	Factor, & NSSIs	Hospital	Korea
²⁶	609	2021	The overall needlestick and sharp injury incidence rate was 24%. HCWs working in tertiary hospitals were 61% less likely to have needlestick and sharp injuries than those employed in secondary hospitals	Nurse, Doctor, Physician	Last year	NSSIs	Hospital	Saudi Arabia
³⁷	144	2013	56.9% (82/144) experienced occupational exposure	Dental & medical	Last 12 months	Sharp injuries	Hospital	Nigeria
¹⁵	2031	2016	The prevalence of NSIs and sharp injuries was 23.7%, and 9.8%, respectively Risk factors for NSIs were training without practice (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.29-2.17), haste (OR, 4.81; 95% CI, 3.41-6.79), lack of awareness (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.04-1.77), inadequate staffing (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.21-2.11), and outdated guidelines (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.04-2.74) One risk factor was identified for sharp injuries: haste (OR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.57-3.76)	Nurses	Not specified	Factor & NSSIs	Hospital	Thailand
⁴⁷	1000	2021	A total of 130 (13%) NSIs were reported during the study period, with an incidence of 8 injuries per 1000 HCP. NSIs occurred in 10.1 per 1000 nurses and in 12.4 per 1000 doctors.	Doctors, nurses, and others	Months	NSIs	Hospital	Qatar
²²	901	2018	248 [27.5%] HCWs had sustained a sharp injury in the previous year. Job categories, titles, education, departments, and training programs were associated with the occurrence of sharp injuries.	Doctor and nurse	Previous year	Sharp injuries	Hospital	China
²³	1956	2019	Psychosocial working conditions and stress perception were directly associated with the events of needlestick injury, as 0.39 (95%CI: 0.32-0.48) and 0.32 (95%CI: 0.22-0.39), respectively. Stress perception had a mediating effect (0.25, 95% CI: 0.19-0.31) between psychosocial working condition and NSIs	Physician, Nurse, and Technician	Last 12 months	Factors & NSSIs	Hospital	China
³⁶	195	2017	The prevalence of sharp injury was 32.8%. HCPS who had no in-service job training were 4.7 times more likely sustained sharp injuries compared with those who had in-service job training (OR: 4.7, 95% CI: 2.05-10.56). HCPS who had previous exposure to sharp injuries were 3.7 times more likely sustained sharp injury compared with those who were not exposed (OR: 3.7, 95% CI = 1.62-8.27).	Nurse, midwife, laboratory, and Others	Last 12 months	Sharps injury	Hospital	Ethiopia
⁴⁵	676	2010	About 72.6%, 491/676 of staff reported sharp injury in the preceding 12 months Most at risk were gynecologist/obstetricians (96.1%) followed by surgeons (91.1%), nurses (80.2%), dentists (75.4%), midwives (62.0%), technicians (50.0%), and pediatricians (47.5%).	Gynecologist/obstetrician, surgeons, nurses, dentist, midwife, and others	12 months	Occupational injury	Hospital	Afghanistan
⁵¹	236	2014	The prevalence of needlestick and sharp injuries among nurses was (74.57%) during the whole work duration About 72.8% of nurses exposed to needlestick while (39.4%) exposed to sharp injuries. About 55.93% of the study participants were exposed during the last year.	Nurses	Career and 12 months	NSSIs	Hospital	Egypt
³⁸	200	2020	The prevalence of needlestick or sharps injury in the past 6 and 12 months was 17.0% and 23.0%, while the mean numbers of injuries were 2.24 ± 2.001 and 2.48 ± 2.858, respectively.	Doctors, nurses, laboratory, ward orderlies	Past 6 and 12 months	NSSI	Hospital	Nigeria
²⁹	219	2021	70 (32%) of HCWs had been exposed to stick injuries. The injuries occurred in almost one-half 48.6%) of the study participants (in the past year.	Doctors, nurses, and laboratory technicians	Career time and 12 months	NSI	Hospitals	Saudi Arabia

Abbreviations: NSI, needlestick injuries; NSSI, needlestick and sharp injuries; HCWs, healthcare workers; HCP, health care personally; OR, odd ratio.

Discussion

The current study aimed to determine the prevalence of occupational-related injuries among HCWs in developing countries. A total of 139 578 HCWs were included in the current review article. The prevalence of occupational injuries among various HCWs, including doctors, nurses, midwives, radiology, laboratory technicians, cleaning staff, mortuaries, housekeepers, public health, anesthetists, gynecologists, obstetricians, and surgeons was included in the current study.

The mean prevalence of occupational injury among HCWs in the last year was 39.16%, which was lower than the finding of another study that reported a 1-year global prevalence of NSIs among HCWs accounted for 44.5%.⁷ Another study conducted in developing countries reported that the prevalence of NSI among HCWs was 35.7%,¹⁷ which was lower than the current finding. The variation may be related to the scope of the study and the outcome reported. Because, the current study reported the prevalence of NSSIs, NSI, and sharp injuries.

Similarly, the current study found a lower prevalence than the findings of another study conducted in sub-Saharan Africa, which reported a one-year prevalence of NSIs ranged from 39% to 91%.³ The variation may be attributed to the scope of the study and the type of occupational exposure to injury considered. Because the latter study was conducted mainly in sub-Saharan Africa that may not represent developing countries.

Furthermore, the current finding was supported by the findings of another study, which reported the last year's prevalence of occupational exposure to NSI among HCWs accounted for 37.8%.⁵⁵ In this study, the prevalence of occupational exposure to sharp injuries in the last year varied across the included study areas (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

The prevalence of occupational injuries in the last year among healthcare workers.

Furthermore, the current study found that the mean prevalence of occupational injury in the career was varied across the included study areas, with the mean prevalence of 60.17%. Another study conducted in sub-Saharan Africa, which reported a lifetime prevalence of NSI ranged from 22% to 95%.³ The variation might be attributed to the scope of the study location and the types of occupational-related injuries considered in the study. The later finding is based on studies conducted in sub-Saharan Africa.

The finding of the current study was lower than the finding of another study, which reported the prevalence of NSI in the career accounted for 64.1%.¹⁷ However, it was higher than the findings of another study, which reported 57.0% of HCWs exposed to NSIs.⁵⁵ The variation can be attributed to the differences in types of exposure and regions or scope of the study. Because, the current study reported the prevalence of NSSIs, NSIs, and sharp injuries.

Furthermore, the current study found that the mean prevalence of occupational-related injury in the career time was varies across the world (Figure 3). Overall, the study found a prevalence of any occupational injuries in the last year and career time among HCWs working in the health facility, which accounted for 39.16% and 60.17%, respectively. However, occupational injuries have serious health problems and are a potential source of blood-borne pathogens such as HBV and HIV. Therefore, applying standard precautions, occupational health and safety measures or services, regular training on infection prevention, and proper implementation of guidelines plays a major role in reducing occupational exposure to sharp injuries and preventing infectious diseases among HCWs.

Figure 3.

The prevalence of occupational-related injuries in the last year among healthcare workers.

Possible Prevention Strategies

Integrated approaches to occupational health and safety, including engineering measures, administrative policy, and the use of personal protective equipment should be implemented to control, eliminate, or reduce occupational exposure to injuries or hazards.⁵⁶ Furthermore, there is a need to implement priority strategies, which include strengthening of international and national policies for health at work, promotion of a healthy work environment, healthy work practices, strengthening occupational health services, development of occupational health standards, and strengthening of research.⁵⁷ By improving HCWs’ knowledge, behavior, or processes regarding the proper choice and safe operation of needles, scalpels, and other sharp devices necessary in the delivery of healthcare, education and training interventions also play a significant role in reducing sharps injuries.⁵⁸

Conclusions

This systematic review found a higher percentage of career time and previous 1-year occupational injuries in developing countries. The study suggests that about 39% and more than half (60%) of HCWs were experienced occupational-related injuries in the last year and in their career time, respectively. Therefore, efforts should be made to reduce the high burden of occupational-related injuries through effective implementation of standard precaution measures along with occupational health and safety measures.

Limitations

There was an unequal distribution of occupations among the included articles that made the comparison of occupational injuries among different occupations more difficult. On the other hand, the prevalence of occupational injuries in some countries was not covered due to the lack of studies.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-hme-10.1177_23333928231192834 - Supplemental material for Occupational-Related Injuries and Associated Risk Factors Among Healthcare Workers Working in Developing Countries: A Systematic Review

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-hme-10.1177_23333928231192834 for Occupational-Related Injuries and Associated Risk Factors Among Healthcare Workers Working in Developing Countries: A Systematic Review by Desi Debelu, Dechasa Adare Mengistu, Sina Temesgen Tolera, Alemayehu Aschalew and Wegene Deriba in Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors extend their deepest thanks to Haramaya University, Department of Environmental Health staff, for providing their constructive support.

Authors’ Contributions

DD conceived the idea and had a major role in the review, extraction, and analysis of data, writing, drafting, and editing of the manuscript. DD, DAM, STT, WD, and AA have contributed to data extraction. DD, DAM, STT, WD, and AA contributed to quality assessment, drafting, and editing of the manuscript. Finally, all authors DD, DAM, STT, WD, and AA read and approved the final version of the manuscript to be published and agreed on all aspects of this work.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Dechasa Adare Mengistu

Data Availability Statement

Almost all data are included in this study. However, additional data can be available from the corresponding authors on the reasonable request. Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Author Biographies

Desi Debelu is a MSc candidate in environmental health. Her research areas include public health, infection prevention and control, occupational health and safety, climate change, water quality and environmental health.

Dechasa Adare Mengistu holds MSc in environmental health. He is working as a lecturer and researcher as well as a director of Infection prevention and control. His research areas includes, food microbiology, public health, infection prevention and control, climate change and health, occupational health and safety, industrial hygiene and environmental health.

Sina Temesgen Tolera is a PhD candidate in environmental health. His research areas include public health, infection prevention and control, toxicology, industrial hygiene, climate change and health, occupational health and safety, and environmental health.

Alemayehu Aschalew is a PhD candidate in environmental health. His research areas include infection prevention and control, water quality, climate change and health, occupational health and safety, and environmental health.

Wegene Deriba holds a MSc in environmental health. His research areas include, sanitation, Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH), environmental analysis, public health, vector prevention and control, and environmental health.

References

Tawiah

B-A

Alberta

B-A

Appiah-Brempong

, et al. Identifying occupational health hazards among healthcare providers and ancillary staff in Ghana: a scoping review protocol. BMJ Open. 2022;12(1):e058048.

World Health Organization. Occupational health [Internet], 2021. https://www.who.int/health-topics/occupational-health

Mossburg

Agore

Nkimbeng

Commodore-Mensah

‡. Occupational hazards among healthcare workers in Africa: a systematic review. Ann Glob Health. 2019; 85(1): 78, 1-13.

World Health Organization. Health workers: health worker occupational health. who.int, 2018. http://www.who.int/occupational_health/topics/hcworkers/en/

Hämäläinen

Takala

. Global estimates of occupational accidents and work-related illnesses 2017. workplace safety and health Institute, Singapore and Ministry of social Affairs and health, Finland. 2017. http://www.icohweb.org/site/images/news/pdf/Report%20Global%20Estimates%20of%20Occupational%20Accidents%20and%20Work-related%20Illnesses%202017%20rev1.pdf

World Health Organization (WHO). Needlestick injuries. 2019. https://www.who.int/occupational_health/topics/needinjuries/en/

Bouya

Balouchi

Rafiemanesh

Amirshahi

Dastres

Poodineh

. Global prevalence and device related causes of needle stick injuries among health care workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Glob Health. 2020; 86(1): 35, 1-8.

Reis

La-Rotta

EIG

Diniz

Aoki

Jorge

. Occupational exposure to potentially infectious biological material among physicians, dentists, and nurses at a university. Saf Health Work. 2019;10(4):445-e451.

Tarantola

Rachline

. Infection risks following accidental exposure to blood or body fluids in health care workers: a review of pathogens transmitted in published cases. Am J Infect Control. 2006;34(6):367-e75.

10.

CDC. Guidelines for the management of occupational exposures to HBV, HCV, and HIV and recommendations for postexposure prophylaxis. Morbid Mortal Weekly Report. Atlanta 2001;50(3):3e7.

11.

Prüss-Üstün

Rapiti

Hutin

. Estimation of the global burden of disease attributable to contaminated sharps injuries among health-care workers. Am J Ind Med. 2005;48(6):482-490.

12.

Cheng

Yen

AMF

Huang

. Factors affecting occupational exposure to needlestick and sharps injuries among dentists in Taiwan: a nationwide survey. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(4):34911.

13.

Weldesamuel

Gebreyesus

Beyen

. Assessment of needle stick and sharp injuries among health care workers in central zone of Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. BMC Res Notes. 2019;12(2019):654.

14.

Cooke

Stephens

. Clinical, economic, and humanistic burden of needlestick injuries in healthcare workers. Med Devices (Auckl). 2017;10(2017):225.

15.

Kasatpibal

Whitney

Katechanok

. Prevalence and risk factors of needlestick injuries, sharps injuries, and blood and body fluid exposures among operating room nurses in Thailand. Am J Infect Control. 2016;44(1):85-90.

16.

Santos

Rocha

FLR

Marziale

MHP

. Needlesticks with safety devices and accident prevention: an integrative review. Rev Bras Enferm. 2018;71(6):3084-3092.

17.

Mengistu

Tolera

. Prevalence of occupational exposure to needle-stick injury and associated factors among healthcare workers of developing countries: systematic review. J Occup Health. 2020;62:e12179.

18.

Moher

Shamseer

, Clarke, M., et al. PRISMA-P Group, Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1-9. 2015.

19.

The Joanna Briggs Institute. Critical appraisal tools for use in the JBI systematic reviews checklist for prevalence studies. 2017.

20.

Zhang

Cui

Stallones

Xiang

. Needlestick and sharps injuries among nurses at a teaching hospital in China. Workplace Health Saf. 2015;63(5):219-225.

21.

Lin

Gao

Cui

, et al. A survey of sharps injuries and occupational infections among healthcare workers in Shanghai. Ann Transl Med. 2019;7(22):2019.

22.

Cui

Zhu

Zhang

Wang

. Sharp injuries: a cross-sectional study among health care workers in a provincial teaching hospital in China. Environ Health Prev Med. 2018;23(1):1-7.

23.

Wang

Huang

Dai

. Relationship between psychosocial working conditions, stress perception, and needle-stick injury among healthcare workers in Shanghai. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):874.

24.

Zhao

Zhang

Xuan

, et al. Burden of insulin injection-related needlestick injuries in mainland China–prevalence, incidence, and healthcare costs. Int J Nurs Stud. 2019;97 (2019):78-83.

25.

Sun

Qin

Jia

, et al. Investigation and analysis of sharp injuries among health care workers from 36 hospitals in Shandong Province, China. Biomed Res Int. 2021;2021:1-7.

26.

Makeen

Alharbi

Mahfouz

, et al. Needlestick and sharps injuries among secondary and tertiary healthcare workers, Saudi Arabia. Nurs Open. 2022;9(1):816-823.

27.

Fadil

Abdelmutalab

Abdelhafeez

, et al. Pattern and risk factors of sharp object injuries among health care workers in two tertiary hospitals, al Taif-Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 2016–2018. Saudi J Biol Sci. 2021;28(11):6582-6585.

28.

Alitubeera

Mutanda

Aggrey

, et al. Prevalence, correlates of occupational percutaneous injuries and use of post exposure prophylaxis against HIV, hepatitis B among health workers in Kampala, Uganda-May 2016. J Interv Epidemiol Public Health. 2021;4(3):13-31.

29.

Albeladi

Almudaraa

Alqusibri

Alqerafi

Alsenani

Abd-Ellatif

. Needle stick injuries among health care workers in AL-Madinah AL-Munawara Governmental Hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Glob J Health Sci. 2021;13(11):76-88.

30.

Goel

Kumar

Lingaiah

Singh

. Occurrence of needlestick and injuries among health-care workers of a tertiary care teaching hospital in north India. J Lab Physicians. 2017;9(1):20-25.

31.

Jahangiri

Rostamabadi

Hoboubi

Tadayon

Soleimani

. Needle stick injuries and their related safety measures among nurses in a university hospital, Shiraz, Iran. Saf Health Work. 2016;7(1):72-77.

32.

Masoumi-Asl

Rahbar

Soltani

Pezeshki

Khanaliha

Kolifarhood

. Epidemiology of needlestick injuries among healthcare workers in Tehran, Iran: a cross-sectional study. Arch Clin Infect Dis. 2017;12(2):1-7.

33.

Assen

Wubshet

Kifle

Wubayehu

. Magnitude and associated factors of needle stick and sharps injuries among health care workers in Dessie City Hospitals, north east Ethiopia. BMC Nurs. 2020;19(1):1-8.

34.

Getie

Wondmieneh

Tesfaw

. The prevalence of needlesticks and sharp injuries, and the associated factors among midwives and nurses in North Wollo Zone Public Hospitals, North East Ethiopia: An institution-based cross-sectional study. Drug Healthc Patient Saf. 2020;12(2020):187-193.

35.

Bekele

Gebremariam

Kaso

Ahmed

. Factors associated with occupational needle stick and sharps injuries among hospital healthcare workers in Bale zone, Southeast Ethiopia. PLoS One. 2015;10(10):e0140382.

36.

Sharew

Mulu

Habtewold

Gizachew

. Occupational exposure to sharps injury among healthcare providers in Ethiopia regional hospitals. Ann Occup Environ Med. 2017;29(1):1-7.

37.

Osazuwa-Peters

Obarisiagbon

Azodo

Ehizele

Obuekwe

. Occupational exposure to sharp injuries among medical and dental house officers in Nigeria. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2013;26(2):283-290.

38.

Nwoga

Ajuba

Nwankwo

. Occupational accidents among healthcare workers in a tertiary health facility in Enugu state, South-East Nigeria. Int J Community Med Public Health. 2020:7(6):2005-2010.

39.

Çalıkoğlu

Bedir

Akçay

Gümüş

. Needlestick and sharps injuries among nurses at atatürk university research hospital and their practices after injury. Eur Res J. 2019;5(1):128-133.

40.

Düzgöl

Aksay

Durgun

, et al. Risk groups for needlestick injury among healthcare workers in children’s hospital: a cross-sectional study. J Pediatr Infect/Cocuk Enfeksiyon Dergisi. 2020;14(4):212-217.

41.

Appiagyei

Nakua

Donkor

Mock

. Occupational injuries among health care workers at a public hospital in Ghana. Pan Afr Med J. 2021;39(1):1-13 .

42.

McDowall

Laher

. Cross-sectional survey on occupational needle stick injuries among prehospital emergency medical service personnel in Johannesburg. Afr J Emerg Med. 2019;9(4):197-201.

43.

Atmaja

Wirawan

. Risk factors of needlestick and sharp injuries among health care workers at Sanglah Tertiary Hospital. Jurnal Berkala Epidemiologi. 2021;9(1):36-43.

44.

Lee

Kok

Cheng

Lin

. Needlestick and sharps injuries among dental healthcare workers at a university hospital. J Formos Med Assoc. 2014;113(4):227-233.

45.

Salehi

Garner

. Occupational injury history and universal precautions awareness: a survey in Kabul hospital staff. BMC Infect Dis. 2010;10(1):1-4.

46.

Ali

Majeed Huwiezy . Prevalence of needlestick injuries among healthcare workers in Rizgary Teaching Hospital. Polytechnic J. 2020;10(2):27-31.

47.

Razzakh

Qureshi

. Needlestick injuries among healthcare personnel in Qatar: a retrospective study. Qatar Med J. 2021;2021(2):35.

48.

Mbaisi

Wanzala

Omolo

. Prevalence and factors associated with percutaneous injuries and splash exposures among health-care workers in a provincial hospital, Kenya, 2010. Pan Afr Med J. 2013;14(1).

49.

Chalya

Seni

Mushi

, et al. Needle-stick injuries and splash exposures among health-care workers at a tertiary care hospital in north-western Tanzania. Tanzan J Health Res. 2015;17(2):2014.

50.

Cho

Lee

Choi

Park

Yoo

. Factors associated with needlestick and sharp injuries among hospital nurses: a cross-sectional questionnaire survey. Int J Nurs Stud. 2013;50(8):1025-1032.

51.

Ahmed

. Needle stick and sharp injuries among nurses at Zagazig University Hospitals, Sharkia Governorate, Egypt. Middle East J Appl Sci. 2014;4(4):1205-1211.

52.

Mishra

Sharma

Gupta

. Occupational health cognizance: needle stick injuries among student nurses. Int J Afr Nurs Sci. 2021;15:100370.

53.

Dilie

Amare

Gualu

. Occupational exposure to needle stick and sharp injuries and associated factors among health care workers in Awi Zone, Amhara Regional State, Northwest Ethiopia, 2016. J Environ Public Health. 2017:1-7.

54.

Abdulmageed

Alabbassi

Alradi

Alghanaim

Banjar

Alnakhli

. Assessment of occupational exposure to sharp injuries among health care workers in King Abdulaziz University Hospital. Int J Community Med Public Health. 2018;5(5):1756-1761.

55.

Mengistu

Tolera

Demmu

. Worldwide prevalence of occupational exposure to needle stick injury among healthcare workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol. 2021:1-10.

56.

Cooklin

Joss

Husser

Oldenburg

. Integrated approaches to occupational health and safety: a systematic review. Am J Health Promot. 2017;31(5):401-412.

57.

Goldstein

Helmer

Fingerhut

. The WHO global strategy on occupational health and safety. Afr Newslett Occup Health Safety. 2001;11(3):56-60.

58.

Verbeek

Husman

Dijk

Jauhiainen

Pasternack

. Building an evidence base for occupational health interventions. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2004;30(2):164-168.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.01 MB