Background. Healthcare workers are at high risk of occupational exposure to needle stick injury worldwide. Occupational exposure to needle stick injury represents the most common sources of infection such as hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, and human immunodeficiency virus. Thus, this review aimed to determine the career time and previous one-year global pooled prevalence of occupational exposure to needle stick injury among healthcare workers. Methods. The review considered articles written in English language and published from 2012 to 2020. The articles were searched using nine electronic databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Cochrane library, Web of Science, SCOPUS, MedNar, and ScienceDirect) using a combination of Boolean logic operators (AND, OR, and NOT), Medical Subject Headings, and keywords. Quality assessment was performed to determine the relevance of the articles using Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. Several steps of assessment and evaluation were taken to select and analyze the relevant articles. Results. The worldwide pooled prevalence of needle stick injuries among healthcare workers during career time and previous one year was 56.2% (95% CI: 47.1, 64.9) and 32.4% (95% CI: 22.0, 44.8), respectively. The career time pooled prevalence of needle stick injuries based on the socioeconomic development and study area was 54.8% and 55.1%, respectively, and one-year pooled prevalence of needle stick injury was 26.0% and 20.9%. Conclusion. The review found a high prevalence of occupational exposure to needle stick injury among healthcare workers and suggests the need to improve occupational health and safety services in the healthcare systems.

Background Healthcare workers are at high risk of infection from blood‐borne pathogens, such as Hepatitis B and C Virus, and Human Immunodeficiency. Occupational exposure to needle‐stick injuries (NSIs) continue to have a major health problem in the healthcare systems of developing countries. Thus, this review article aimed to provide the evidence on the prevalence of NSI and associated factors among healthcare workers of developing countries. Methods The studies published from 2012 to 2019 were identified through systematic searches of electronic databases such as PubMed, Google Scholar, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Scopus, Med Nar, and Science Direct. The MeSH terms and/or keywords was used in conjunction with “AND” or “OR” (Boolean logic operators). All identified keywords and an index terms were checked across the included databases. Assessment and evaluation were taken to confirm the quality and relevance of the included articles, followed by extraction and analysis of data. Result Overall, 2021 articles were identified using specified search terms from the initial searches of the literature (2012‐2019). A total of 13 articles met eligibility criteria were included in the review. Among 6513 participants, 1009 and 2201 participants involved to determine 1‐year and throughout career prevalence, respectively. The prevalence of NSI ranged from 19.9% to 54.0% with an overall prevalence of 35.7% and 38.5 to 100% with an overall prevalence of 64.1% in the previous 1 year and throughout career, respectively. Sex, workload, needle recapping, overuse of injection, and practice of universal precautions, training, occupation, working experience, and personal protective equipment were among the factors associated with the prevalence of NSIs in developing countries. Conclusion The review indicated that NSIs have been identified as one of the most serious issues that affect the health and well‐being of healthcare workers in the majority of healthcare systems of developing countries. There is a need to apply safety practices or other measures to reduce the risk of NSIs.

Background. Occupational exposure to blood and body fluids has become a serious public health problem for healthcare workers and is a major risk for the transmission of various infections such as human immune-deficiency virus, hepatitis B virus, and hepatitis C virus. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to determine the career time and previous one-year global pooled prevalence of occupational exposure to blood and body fluids among healthcare workers. Methods. For the review, the articles published in English were searched using the electronic databases (SCOPUS/Science Direct, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, DOAJ, and MedNar) with a combination of Boolean logic operators (AND, OR, and NOT), Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), and keywords. A quality assessment was conducted to determine the relevance of the articles using JBI critical appraisal tools. Furthermore, several steps of assessment and evaluation were taken to select and analyze the relevant articles. Results. Of the 3912 articles identified through the electronic database search, 33 that met the inclusion criteria were included in the final analysis. The current study found that the global pooled prevalence of blood and body fluids among healthcare workers during career time and in the previous one year accounted for 56.6% (95% CI: 47.3, 65.4) and 39.0% (95% CI: 32.7, 45.7), respectively. Based on subgroup analysis by publication year, survey year, and World Health Organization regions, the highest prevalence of blood and body fluid exposure in the last 12 months was observed among articles published between 2004 and 2008 (66.3%), conducted between 2003 and 2008 (66.6%), and conducted in the Southeast Asia Region (46.9%). The highest career time prevalence was 60.6%, 71.0%, and 68.4% for articles published between 2015 and 2020, conducted between 2015 and 2019, and reported in the African region, respectively. Conclusion. The current study revealed a high prevalence of occupational exposure to blood and body fluids among healthcare workers and suggests the need to improve occupational health and safety services in healthcare systems globally.

No abstract

Background: According to the literature analysis, the majority of the studies focused primarily on public health institutions. Although assessing the compliance of healthcare workers in private and public institutions would give comprehensive evidence on existing problems and appropriate prevention method, as a result, research on adherence to standard precautions are still required. Rely on existing research, to the best of the investigator’s knowledge, compliance with standard precautions in hospitals of Bahir Dar town has not been assessed. Therefore, this study will contribute to narrowing these gaps and determining the scope of problems with standard precautions. Methods: An institution-based cross-sectional study design was conducted among 442 healthcare workers working in hospitals from June 10 to 30, 2021. A stratified random sampling technique was employed to select the study participants. Pre-tested and structured questionnaires and an observational checklist were used to collect the required data. The data were entered into EpiData and analyzed using SPSS version 22. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were used to assess the association between independent and outcome variables. Odd ratios at 95% CI were used to measure the strength of the association between the outcome and explanatory variables. Finally, a P-value of <.05 was considered as a cut-off point for statistical significance. Results: Of the 442 healthcare workers who participated in the study, 41% were compliant with standard precautions. Furthermore, 68.1% and 51.8% of the respondents had good knowledge and a positive attitude toward infection prevention, respectively. Consistent water supply availability (AOR = 1.92 and 95% CI = 1.63, 6.27), and access to infection prevention guidelines (AOR = 1.73 and 95% CI = 1.08, 2.77), and availability of personal protective equipment (AOR = 2.32 and 95% CI = 1.35, 3.98) were some of the factors significantly associated with health care workers’ compliance. Conclusions: The current study found that only about two-fifths of the healthcare workers complied with standard precautions. The study suggests that there is a significant risk of developing an infection. Therefore, the concerned organizations; Bahir Dar Zonal Health Office, and respective sectors including Amhara Regional Health Office and the Federal Ministry of Health must take appropriate measures to improve the implementation of safety practices.