Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Research note
  • Open Access

Prevalence of needle stick injury and its associated factors among nurses working in public hospitals of Dessie town, Northeast Ethiopia, 2016

BMC Research Notes201811:413

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-018-3529-9

  • Received: 16 March 2018
  • Accepted: 22 June 2018
  • Published:

Abstract

Objective

Nurses are exposed to dangerous and deadly blood borne pathogens through contaminated needle stick injuries. This study was designed to assess prevalence of needle stick injury and its associated factors among nurses working in hospitals. Institution-based cross-sectional study design was used among 258 randomly selected nurses. Collected data was entered into Epi-Data version 3.1 and transferred to SPSS Version 20.0 for analysis. The degree of variables were assessed using adjusted odds ratio and its 95% confidence interval with P value (< 0.05).

Results

Eighty-nine (34.5%) nurses self-reported receiving a needle stick injury in the previous 12 months. Work experience, working hour, personal protective, infection prevention guide line utilization and infection prevention training were significantly associated to needle stick injury.

Conclusions

The needle stick injury in this study area was prevalent. The contributing factors to the injury were duration of working hours, experience, use of personal protective equipment and training.

Keywords

  • Prevalence
  • Associated factors
  • Needle stick injury
  • Nurse

Introduction

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) USA defines a needle stick injury as injuries that are caused by objects such as hypodermic needles, blood collection needles, cannula and needles used to connect parts of IV delivery systems. Health Professionals who are exposed to needles in their clinical activities are at high risk of acquiring a needle stick which may lead to a serious or fatal infection with blood borne pathogens such as hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV) or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) [1, 2].

Approximately 3 million HCWs are exposed to blood borne viruses each year. Blood has been implicated as the source of the exposure in nearly all occupationally acquired infections. Exposures occur through needle sticks contaminated with an infected patient’s blood or through contact of the eye, nose or mouth with the patient’s blood [35]. On average, a healthcare worker (HCWs) in Africa suffers two to four needle stick injuries per year [6, 7].

NSI is one of the greatest risks faced by the front line health care worker. Yet, these exposures have often been considered as part of the job [8, 9]. Nurses are an integral part of clinical services and have primary responsibility for a greater proportion of patient care in most health care settings [10]. Nurses are at high risk to occupational hazards and injuries in the course of their day to day activities in the health care environment [11]. By considering the nature of the nurses’ working environment, responsibilities and duties, nurses are at high risk of numerous occupational hazards such as infectious disease, chemical risks, environmental risks, and psychosocial risks [1215].

A few studies reported high prevalence of needle stick injury in central and eastern part of the country [16]. Therefore this study aims to assess the prevalence and associated factors among nurses working in public hospitals of Dessie town, Northeast Ethiopia.

Main text

Methodology

Study area and period

The study was conducted at public hospitals of Dessie town, Dessie, which is located at 401 km Northeast of Addis Ababa. The health facilities which are found in Dessie are two governmental hospitals, eight health centers, two NGOs clinics, three private hospitals 27 different size private clinics. The study was conducted from November 2015 to June, 2016.

Study design

Institutional based cross-sectional study design was conducted.

Sample size

A total of 313 samples were calculated using a single population proportion formula by assuming 5% marginal error and 95% confidence interval (σ = 0.05) and Prevalence of the needle stick injury 18.7% [17] and by adding 10% of non-response rate.

Sampling technique and procedures

About 258 subjects were selected using simple random sampling technique. The sample size had been distributed into each hospital according to proportional to population allocation. To select individual participant from each hospital, lottery method was used.

Data collection tools and techniques

Data was collected by using structured self-administered questionnaire adapted from previous similar literatures. Two days training was given to all data collectors and supervisors prior to pretesting. Eight data collectors who had completed diploma in nurses were recruited.

Data processing and analysis

The collected data was coded, cleaned and entered into Epi-Data version 3.1 and transferred to Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20.0 for analysis. Bi-variable and multivariate logistic regression model were done to identify the relative importance of each predictor to the dependent variable by controlling for the effect of other variables. Those variables which were potential independent predictors on Bivariable analysis with P-value < 0.25 was entered to multivariable logistic regression analysis.

Ethical considerations

The Ethical approval was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of College of Health Sciences, Aksum University. Communications with the health center administrations was made through a formal letter obtained from Aksum University, College of Heath Science and TRHB. The objective and importance of the study was explained to the study participants. Data was collected after full informed written consent was obtained from participants aged 18 years and more, but age less than 18 years from the guardian.

Results

Socio-demographic Characteristics

Two hundred fifty eight nurses were included in this study. The response rate was 97.6% (n = 252). The majority of the respondents 141 (56%) were females. More than two-thirds [171 (67.9%)] of the respondents reported being between the age of 20–29 years. One hundred and sixty eight (66.7%) respondents reported 168 (66.7%) having less than or equal to 5 years work experience. Additionally, 152 (60.3%) of participants had a degree and above. Two hundred one (79.8%) of the nurses work less than or equals to 40 h per week (See Table 1).
Table 1

Socio-demographic characteristics of nurses working in public hospitals of Dessie Town, March, 2016 (n = 252)

Variables

Description

Frequency

Percent (%)

Sex

Male

111

44

Female

141

56

Age group

20–29 years

171

67.9

30–39 years

35

13.9

40–49 years

46

18.2

Experience

≤ 5 years

168

66.7

5–10 yeas

31

12.3

> 10 years

53

21.0

Educational status

Diploma

100

39.7

Degree and above

152

60.3

Working hours per week

≤ 40 h

201

79.8

> 40 h

51

20.2

Prevalence and circumstances of needle stick injury

The prevalence of needle stick injury among nurses working in public hospitals of Dessie town was 34.5% (n = 87) and 48.8% (n = 123) for the last year and throughout their career, respectively. From the total of respondents who had ever experienced needle stick injury, 84 (68.3%) were exposed to NSI only once. Hallow bore needle 71 (57.7%) followed by Suturing needle 35 (28.5%) was the most common devices involved in the injuries. Among injured nurses, 53.7% of the injuries occurred during night shift. The highest risky areas was surgical ward which accounts 26 (21.1%). One hundred three (82.7%) of accidents occurred in a noisy, dimly lit working environment. Regarding the degree of the injury, 69 (56.1%) respondents reported that the injury they were suffered was superficial. More than two-third 86 (66.9%) of injured nurses didn’t receive post exposure prophylaxis. Similarly, the majority of nurses 208 (82.5%) used personal protective equipment during a procedure while 123 (59.4%) reported using single glove as their personal protective equipment. Two hundred forty (95.2%) of nurses disposed of the needle using a safety box after completion of the procedures. only 177 (70.2) of nurses had knowledge of an infection prevention guideline and only three-quarters (n = 190) followed the guidelines. More than two-thirds (n = 177) and an almost equal number (n = 185) of nurses had received the hepatitis B vaccine and training on infection prevention respectively (See Table 2).
Table 2

Prevalence and circumstances of needle stick injury among nurses working in public hospitals of Dessie Town, March, 2016 (n = 252)

Variables

Description

Frequency

Percent (%)

NSI

Yes

123

48.5

No

129

50.5

Duration

Within 1 year

87

34.5

Before a year

36

14.3

How often

Once

84

68.3

Two to four times

29

23.6

≥ five times

7

5.7

Didn’t recall

3

2.4

Materials leading to injury

Hallow bore needle

71

57.7

Suturing needle

35

28.5

Cannula

18

13.8

Working shift

Day

57

46.3

Night

66

53.7

Working area/unit

OPD

10

8.1

Emergency

19

15.4

Pediatric ward

21

17.1

Medical

19

15.4

Surgical

26

21.1

OR

15

12.2

OBY-GYNI

7

5.7

ICU

6

4.9

Condition of working environment

Bright light

16

13.0

Dim light

47

38.2

Noisy

56

45.5

Room temperature

4

3.3

Injury type

Superficial

69

56.1

Moderate

50

40.6

Deep

4

3.3

Did you get Rx after injury?

Yes

37

30.1

No

86

69.9

Did you use PPE?

Yes

208

82.5

No

44

17.5

Type of PPE used

Single glove

123

59.4

Double glove

73

35.3

Mask

9

4.3

Goggle

2

1.0

Did you safety box?

Yes

240

95.2

No

12

4.8

Did your hospital has IP guideline?

Yes

177

70.2

No

75

29.8

Did you follow IP guide line?

Yes

190

75.4

No

62

24.6

Did you received HBV Vaccine?

Yes

177

70.2

No

75

29.8

Did you received HBV IP training?

Yes

185

73.4

No

67

26.6

Procedures played a role in the causes needle stick injury, injection is the leading one (24.4%) followed by suturing (16.3%).

Factors associated to needle stick injury

Based on a multiple logistic regression result, nurses with work experience greater than 10 years were more than six times at higher risk to sustain needle stick injury than those who work experience were less than or equals to 5 years with (AOR = 6.321, 95% CI 2.865–13.948). Nurses who worked greater than 40 h per were nearly three times at higher risk to sustain needle stick injury than those who worked hours less than or equals to 40 h per week with (AOR = 2.903, 95% CI 1.297–6.498). Nurses who do not use personal protective equipment during procedure were five times at more risk to sustain needle stick injury than their counter parts (AOR = 5.055, 95% CI 2.015–12.688). The risk of needle stick injury was nearly five times higher in nurses who didn’t follow infection prevention guidelines than those followed it (AOR = 4.623, 95% CI 2.052–10.416). Nurses who didn’t receive infection prevention training were nearly six times at more risk than nurses who received training (AOR = 5.780, 95% CI 2.691–12.415) (See Table 3).
Table 3

Factors Associated with Occurrence of Needle Stick Injuries among Nurses Working in Public Hospitals of Dessie Town, March, 2016 (n = 252)

Variables

Injury status

COR With 95% CI

AOR With 95% CI

Yes

No

Age group

 20–29 years

71

100

1.00

 

 30–39 years

22

13

2.38 (1.126–5.046)*

 

 40+ years

30

16

2.641 (1.340–5.206)*

 

Experience category

 ≤ 5 years

73

95

1.00

1.000

 5–10 years

15

16

1.220 (0.566–5.046)*

2.331 (0.925–5.871)**

 > 10 years

35

18

2.530 (1.1327–4.842)*

6.321 (2.865–13.948)**

Working hours per week

 ≤ 40 h

87

114

1.00

1.000

 > 40 h

36

15

3.15 (1.619–6.108)*

2.903 (1.297–6.498)**

Use of PPE

 Yes

87

121

1.00

1.000

 No

36

8

6.26 (2.773–14.127)*

5.055 (2.015–12.688)**

Use of safety box

 Yes

113

127

1.00

 

 No

10

2

5.62 (1.206–26.191)*

 

Availability of guide line

 Yes

65

112

1.00

 

 No

58

17

5.88 (3.156–10.939)*

 

Follow IP guide line

 Yes

73

117

1.00

1.000

 No

50

12

6.68 (3.334–13.375)*

4.623 (2.052–10.416)**

Receiving IP training

 Yes

71

114

1.00

1.000

 No

52

15

5.56 (2.916–10.623)*

5.780 (2.691–12.415)**

* Significantly associated at COR

** Significantly associated at AOR

Discussion

Needle stick injuries are the most common route by which blood-borne viruses and/or infections such as HIV and hepatitis B and C. Such infections serve as high occupational risks and threats to healthcare workers, especially where basic rules of occupational safety and health are not implemented [18]. Among nurses who are working in public hospitals of Dessie town, the prevalence of needle stick injury in the previous 12 months prior to the survey was 34.5%. This finding is in line with results from previous study of Jigjiga (32.7%) and Hawassa (35.8%), Ethiopia [19, 20].

But this finding is higher than findings of Australia and Malaysia which is 17.7 and 27.9% respectively [21, 22] and lower than findings of Korea (70.4%) and Iran (54%) [23, 24]. Current result is also lower than studies of Addis Ababa and Jimma, Ethiopia (51.6 and 39.3%) respectively [25, 26]. The possible reason for difference in the proportion of injury could be the socio-demographic/economic status and cultural differences in self-reporting behavior. It also could be due to the difference in the study health facility setups, implementation of universal precaution, mixing up of study participants (all types of health care personnel Vs nurses only) and even the year of the study.

With regard to experience, the odds of sustaining needle stick injury was higher for nurses with work experience greater than 10 years than those whose work experience is less than or equals to 5 years with. This is in line with report from Portugal and Pakistan indicating experience greater than 10 years increases risk for sustaining needle stick injury and those with experience greater than 5 years are at greater risk to sustain NSI respectively [27, 28]. This could be explained by more exposure due to longer duration of services and hence more NSI among more experienced nurses as compare to those working for greater than 5 years. Younger workers apply more recently acquired knowledge into practice, while experienced familiarity may contribute to taking fewer precautions and paying less attention at work, which are likely to increase the chance of human error and contribute to risk behaviors.

Regarding to working hours per week, nurses whose working hour per week greater than 40 h were nearly three times at higher risk to sustain needle stick injury compared to those whose working hours per week is less than or equals to 40 h. This is similar with the finding of Iran and Sub-Saharan Africa [24, 29]. This is also in agreement with result from Jigjiga, eastern Ethiopia [19]. This could be explained by work load makes health professionals to be stressed, loss their ability to concentrate and fatigue, which are more likely to increase the chance of human error and contribute to a tendency towards risky behaviors and poor compliance with the precautions in general. It also suggests the problem of under-staffing in developing countries. Hence it has implications for policy makers and hospital administrators to ensure that working hours do not exceed than those prescribed in legislation.

Nurses who do not use personal protective equipment during procedure were more than four times at more risk to sustain needle stick injury than their counter parts. This is in line with previous report from Hawassa, south Ethiopia and other, which was 86.4% of HCWs use PEP consistently and those who don’t use were significantly associated accidental needle stick injury [5, 20]. This can also be explained by those who follow universal precaution are believed to have a good knowledge, and attitude and applied to prevent injury.

Those nurses who had not attended any training on prevention and management of needle stick injuries in their workplace were at a significantly greater risk of sustaining such injury compared with those who had attended some kind of training. This finding is similar with reports of Sub-Saharan Africa and Kenya [29, 30]. This also in line with finding in Jimma, south west Ethiopia [26]. This may be explained by effective training enhances awareness and improves skills of nurses to reduce unsafe behaviors and implementing organizational strategies to prevent exposure to reduce the risk of such injuries.

Conclusions

This study revealed that more than one-third of the study participants had needle stick injury at least once in the previous 12 months. Inadequate occupational health and safety measures were factors associated with needle stick injury. So that ministry of health and heath professionals associations should create awareness on health professionals on safety measures.

Limitation

By considering nurses are prone for needle stick injury we focuses on those health professionals but all health professionals are at risk and further study is need and systemic review is mandatory to made generalization. Furthermore, the study does not show cause and effect relationship.

Abbreviations

CI: 

confidence interval

AOR: 

Adjusted Odd Ratio

SPSS: 

Statistical Package for Social Sciences

NSI: 

needle stick injury among nurses working in public hospitals of Dessie town

Declarations

Authors’ contributions

AK: conceived and designed the study, analyzed the data and wrote the manuscript. HG involved in data analysis, drafting of the manuscript and advising the whole research paper. HG also were involved in the interpretation of the data and contributed to manuscript preparation. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all study participants and data collectors for their contribution in success of our work.

Competing interests

This manuscript maintains no competing financial interest declaration from any person or organization, or non-financial competing interests such as political, personal, religious, ideological, academic, intellectual, commercial or any other.

Availability of data and materials

The data sets used and analyzed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Consent to publish

Not applicable.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethical clearance was secured from the Aksum University, College of Health Science research review committee. An official letter of permission was obtained from Tigray Regional Health Bureau. Respondents were well informed about the purpose of the study, and information was collected after full oral and written consent from participants. Information was recorded anonymously and confidentially, and beneficence was assured throughout the study period.

Funding

There is no funding for this research. All cost of data collection and analysis were covered by the authors.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
School of Nursing, College of Health Sciences and Referral Hospital, AKsum University, Axum, Ethiopia

References

  1. Norsayani MY, Noor HI. Study on incidence of needle stick injury and factors associated with this problem among medical students. J Occup Health. 2003;45(3):172–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Kermode M, Jolley D, Langkham B, Tomas MS, Crofts N. Occupational exposure to blood and risk of blood borne virus infection among health care workers in rural north Indian health care settings. Am J Infect Control. 2005;33(4):34–41.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Shiao J, Guo L, Laws ML. Estimation of the risk of blood borne pathogens to health-care workers after a needle stick injury in Taiwan. Am J Infect Control. 2005;30(1):15–20.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Glenngård AH, Persson U. Costs associated with sharps injuries in the Swedish health care setting and potential cost savings from needle-stick prevention devices with needle and syringe. Scand J Infect Dis. 2009;41(4):296–302.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Prüss-Ustün E. Rapiti and Y. Hutin. Estimation of the global burden of disease attributable to contaminated sharps injuries among health-care workers. Am J Ind Med. 2005;48(6):482–90.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Elmiyeh B, Whitaker IS, James MJ, et al. Needle-stick injuries in the National Health Service: a culture of silence. J R Soc Med. 2004;97(7):326–7.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Jovic-Vranes A, Jankovic S, Vranes B. Safety practice and professional exposure to blood and blood-containing materials in Serbian health care workers. J Occup Health. 2006;48(5):377–82.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Sagoe MC, Pearson RD, Perry J, Jagger J. Risks to health care workers in developing countries. N Engl J Med. 2010;345(7):538–41.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Foley M, Leyden TA, American Nurses Association’s. Needle stick prevention guide. Washington, D.C: American Nurses Association’s; 2002. p. 1–25.Google Scholar
  10. Ramsay JA. The development and use of JHAs in the emergency department. J Saf Health Environ Res. 2005;2(2):2–18.Google Scholar
  11. Isara AR, Ofili AN. Prevalence of occupational accidents/Injuries among health care workers in a federal medical center in southern Nigeria. West Afr J Med. 2012;31(1):47–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Senthil A, Anandh B, Jayachandran P, et al. Perception and prevalence of work-related health hazards among health care workers in public health facilities in southern India. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2015;21(1):74–81.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Carayon P, Gurses AP. Nursing workload and patient safety-A human factors engineering perspective. An evidence-based handbook for nurses. Agency Healthcare Res Qual. 2005;21(5):284–301.Google Scholar
  14. Environment American Nurses Association Healthy Work. Health and Safety Survey. 2006;106(9):104.Google Scholar
  15. Smith D, Leggat P. Needle stick and sharps injuries among nursing students. J Adv Nurs. 2005;51(5):449–55.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Tadesse M, Tadesse T. Epidemiology of needle stick injuries among health-care workers in Hawassa City, Southern Ethiopia. Trop Doct. 2010;40(2):111–3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Lulie W, Emebet A, Mesihanit T, Hana F, Dereje B, Muluken A. Factors Associated with needle stick and sharp injuries, among health care workers in Felege Hiwot Referral Hospital, Bahir Dar, Northwest Ethiopia: facility based cross-sectional survey. Int J Infect Control. 2013;9(4):1–9.Google Scholar
  18. Sagoe MC, Pearson RD, Perry J, Jagger J. Risks to health care workers in developing countries. N Engl J Med. 2011;345(7):538–41.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Mideksa L, Feyera T. Needle-Stick Injuries and Contributing Factors among Health care Workers in Public Health Facilities in Jigjiga Zone, Eastern Ethiopia. World J Med Sci. 2014;11(4):490–6.Google Scholar
  20. Beyene H, Yirsaw BD. Occupational risk factors associated with needle-stick injury among healthcare workers in Hawassa City, Southern Ethiopia. Occup Med Health Aff. 2014;6(2):1–5.Google Scholar
  21. Smith DR, Smyth W, Leggat P, et al. Needle stick and sharps injuries among nurses in a tropical Australian hospital. Int J Nurs Pract. 2006;12(1):71–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Rampal L, Zakaria R, Sook LW, Zain AM. Needle stick and sharps injuries and factors associated among health care workers in a Malaysian Hospital. Eur J Soc Sci. 2010;13(3):354–62.Google Scholar
  23. Cho E, Lee H, Choi M, et al. Factors associated with needle stick and sharp injuries among hospital nurses. Int J Nurs Stud. 2013;50(8):1025–32.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Jahangiri M, Rostamabadi A, Hoboubi N, Tadayon N, Soleimani A. Needle stick injuries and their related safety measures among nurses in a university hospital, Shiraz, Iran. Saf Health Work 2016;7(1):72–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Desalegn Z, Gebreselassie S, Asemamaw Y. Epidemiology of needle stick-sharp injuries and potential high risk exposures among health professionals in Ethiopia: neglected public health concern. Am J Health Res. 2015;3(5):298–304.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Bidira K, Woldie M, Nemera G. Prevalence and predators of needle stick injury among nurses working in public hospitals of Jimma zone. Int J Nurs Midwifery. 2014;6(7):90–6.Google Scholar
  27. Martinsa A, Coelhob CA, Manuela M. Age and years in practice as factors associated with needle stick and sharps injuries among health care workers in a Portuguese hospital. Accid Anal Prev. 2012;47(1):11–5.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Ahmed Khan E, Aziz A. Prevalence and factors associated with needle stick injuries among registered nurses in public sector tertiary care hospitals of Pakistan. Int J Collab Res Intern Med Public Health. 2011;3(2):124–30.Google Scholar
  29. Sadoh WE, Fawole AO, Sadoh AE. Practice of universal precautions among healthcare workers. Int Med Assoc. 2006;9(2):722–6.Google Scholar
  30. Mbaisi1 M, et al. Prevalence and factors associated with percutaneous injuries and splash exposures among health-care workers in a provincial hospital, Kenya; 2010. http://www.panafrican-med-journal.com/content/article/14/10/full/. Accessed 29 Dec 2015.

Copyright

© The Author(s) 2018

Advertisement