Skip to main content

Prevalence of needlestick injury among healthcare workers in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis



Health facilities can provide diagnostic, curative, and prognostic services for the community. While providing services, healthcare workers can be exposed to needlestick injuries that can transmit pathogenic organisms through body fluids.


The aim was to establish the pooled prevalence of needlestick injuries among healthcare workers in Ethiopia.


This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Articles were searched from Google Scholar, PubMed, Science Direct, and Scopus databases using a combination of keywords and Boolean functions. All the searched articles were imported into the EndNote X9 software, and then, duplicate data files were removed. Article screening and data extraction were done independently by two authors. Data manipulation and analyses were done using STATA version 15.1 software.


The analysis of 23 full-text articles showed that the prevalence of the 12-month and lifetime needlestick injuries among the primary studies ranged from 13.2 to 55.1% and 18.6 to 63.6%, respectively. The pooled prevalence of needlestick injuries among the Ethiopian healthcare workers was 28.8% (95% CI 23.0–34.5) and 43.6% (95% CI 35.3–52.0) for the 12 months and lifetime, respectively.


The pooled prevalence of needlestick injuries among Ethiopian healthcare workers was high. Therefore, efforts should be implemented to reduce the occurrence of injuries. Adequate protective equipment and safety-engineered devices should be supplied for the healthcare workers. It could be more effective to reduce the factors contributing to increased exposures through the allocation of adequate numbers of the healthcare workforce and implementing in-service training.


Healthcare facilities (HCFs) can provide diagnostic, preventive, curative, and prognostic services for the community. However, while they are providing services, healthcare workers (HCWs) are exposed to blood and body fluids through occupational sharps, splashes, and needlestick injuries [1, 2]. Particularly, there is a potential exposure among doctors, nurses, laboratory professionals, and biomedical waste management staff to blood-borne pathogens worldwide [3,4,5]. Needlestick injuries (NSIs) are the most common workplace-related health hazards responsible for the transmission of blood-borne pathogens [6, 7] among the HCWs where safety measures have not already been established [2]. Needles caused accidental penetration of the skin [2, 8,9,10,11]. Injuries mostly happen during needle recapping, operative procedures, blood sample collection, intravenous line administration, and poor waste disposal practices [12]. Following NSIs, more than 20 blood-borne pathogens can be transmitted through body fluids [11, 13]. However, the most common diseases that can be potentially transmitted through body fluids are HIV, HBV, and HCV [11].

Though currently the exact incidence of NSIs is believed to be underreported [14], the World Health Organization (WHO) reported as 3 million HCWs were exposed to blood-borne viruses each year globally. From this, 2 million, 900,000, and 300,000 were contributed to HBV, HCV, and HIV, respectively, and the majority (90%) happened in the developing countries [15, 16]. The high incidence of NSIs associated with blood-borne infections among developing countries is mainly attributed due to the high disease prevalence and lack of proper personal protective devices [17, 18]. The risk of acquiring HBV, HCV, and HIV infections from the sharp exposure when the source patient is positive can range from 2 to 40%, 3 to 10%, and 0.2 to 0.5%, respectively [19, 20]. In addition, HBV can survive up to a week under optimal conditions and has been detected from the discarded needles [21]. The morbidity and mortality associated with occupational hazards are impacting the health and productivity of the health workers [22] through high cost, health consequences, emotional distress, and missing working days [23, 24]. Currently, there is no review conducted with respect to the estimation of NSI prevalence in Ethiopia. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to estimate the pooled prevalence of NSIs among the healthcare workers in Ethiopia.



Ethiopia is a highly populated country in the Horn of Africa. Though, currently, the exact number of the population is unknown, during 2012, it was predicted to be 84,320,987 [25]. Due to rapid population growth, the number of health facilities is increasing [26, 27]. Currently, the healthcare management is grouped into primary, secondary, and tertiary levels. During 2011, there were a total of 22,792 health facilities in the country. From this, hospitals, health centers, health posts, and private clinics accounted for 125, 2999, 15,668, and 4000, respectively [28]. The health posts and health centers provided basic health services to the community, and an estimated 3000–5000 and 40000 population, respectively, is allocated for them. Similarly, primary hospitals serve about 60000–10000 population. General and specialized hospitals cover a wide catchment area, and they provide specialized and referral services for about 1–5 million population [29]. Currently, with the rapid increment of HCFs, the ratio of the healthcare worker task force to the health facilities is becoming quite inadequate [30].

Article searching strategy

Literature search, selection, data extraction, and reporting of the results were conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [31]. Online electronic databases including Google Scholar, PubMed, Science Direct, and Scopus were searched using a combination of keywords and Boolean functions:

  1. (1)

    (needle injur* OR needlestick injur* OR percutaneous injur* OR occupation* exposure OR accident* exposure OR Body fluid* exposure OR accidental occupational exposure OR Occupational hazard*)

  2. (2)

    (health care worker* OR health worker* OR health staff OR medical personnel OR health personnel)

  3. (3)


1 AND 2 AND 3

Eligibility criteria

Articles were included in the study only if they reported the 12-month, lifetime, or both prevalence of NSIs. Primary full-text articles published in English from the Ethiopian settings were the inclusion criteria thereby excluding letters to editors, short communications, and review articles. In addition, the aggregate report of needlestick and sharps injuries were excluded from the study.

Study selection and data extraction

All the searched articles were imported into the EndNote version X9 software, and then, duplicate files were removed. Two investigators (TD and MG) independently screened articles by their title, abstract, and full-text to identify potentially eligible studies according to the predetermined inclusion criteria, and then, the screened articles were compiled together from the two reviewers. The data extraction form was prepared in Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet. Data were extracted from the full-text articles by two reviewers (TD and KA) independently. The data extraction form includes the name of the first author, year of publication, setting (region of the country), study group, sample size, number of needlestick injuries, 12 months prevalence, and lifetime prevalence. Any discrepancy between the two data extractors was resolved by discussion.

Statistical analysis

The extracted data were categorized into 12 months and lifetime needlestick injury and entered into the STATA version 15.1 separately. The prevalence estimates were conducted using the metaprop program. Proportions of exposure (p) and the corresponding standard errors (se) were calculated using p = r/n and se = √p(1 − p)/n, respectively. However, to normalize the distribution, study level estimates were logit transformed using logitp = ln[p/(1-p)], and the corresponding standard error (se) of logit event estimates se = √1/r + 1/(n-r) was calculated. In situations with high across study heterogeneity, the use of random effects models is recommended [32]. The DerSimonian and Laird method is the most common method for using a random effects model for the meta-analysis [33]. The presence of heterogeneity among the studies was checked using the I2 test statistics. The I2 statistics estimates the presence of observed difference between studies due to heterogeneity, and it can range from 0 to 100%. A value of 0% indicates the absence of heterogeneity whereas 100% indicates the presence of significant heterogeneity. The 25%, 50%, and 75% values represent low, medium, and high heterogeneity between studies, respectively [34]. In addition, a p value of less than 0.05 is used to declare heterogeneity [35]. In this meta-analysis, in both 12 months and lifetime prevalence estimates of NSIs, the I2 values were found to be high (> 75%). Since this value is a definite indicator of significant heterogeneity, the analysis was conducted using a random effects model with 95% CI as opposed to the fixed effects model to adjust the observed variability among the studies. Moreover, the sources of heterogeneity were assessed through subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and meta-regression. Finally, small study effects and publication bias were analyzed through visual inspection of the funnel plots and objectively using Egger’s test. All the data manipulations and analysis were performed using the STATA version 15.1 software.

Quality assessment

The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) quality assessment tool for the prevalence studies [36]. The evaluation criteria included nine parameters: (1) appropriate sampling frame, (2) proper sampling technique, (3) adequate sample size, (4) study subject and setting description, (5) sufficient data analysis, (6) use of valid methods for the identified conditions, (7) valid measurement for all participants, (8) using appropriate statistical analysis, and (9) adequate response rate. Two reviewers (TD and MG) assessed the quality of included studies. Finally, studies were categorized into high risk of bias and low risk of bias using 50% as a cutoff value. Articles with a score of ≥ 50% were considered as a low risk of bias.


All the relevant studies published from the Ethiopian settings were searched without any time restriction and manipulated according to the PRISMA guidelines [31]. A total of 348 and 193 articles were retrieved from the database and manual searching, respectively. From this, 110 articles were excluded due to duplication. The remaining 431 articles were evaluated, and 326 data files were excluded based on their title and abstract. Further, 105 full-text articles were screened and 82 were excluded due to being review articles, studies conducted on students, short communications, letters to the editors, and aggregate report of sharp and NSI data. Finally, 23 articles were included in this study (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

The PRISMA flow diagram showing the study selection process

Characteristics of included studies

A total of 23 articles [37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59] were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis, with an overall sample size of 7468 healthcare workers. All the included studies were cross-sectional studies. The earliest study was conducted during 2009 [55], and the latest two articles were published in 2019 [58, 59]. Overall information regarding the prevalence of NSIs was obtained from five regions and two self-administrative cities including Amhara [41, 44, 47, 49, 51, 53, 57,58,59]; Oromia [42, 48, 56]; Southern Nations, Nationalities, and People (SNNP) [37, 46, 50]; Somali [38]; and Harari [43]; two studies were conducted on both Somali and Dre Dawa (SAC) [52, 55], and four articles were obtained from two self-administrative cities Addis Ababa and Dire Dawa [39, 40, 45, 54]. The sample size across the studies was ranged from 162 [37] to 760 [46]. Among the studies, ten articles exclusively reported the 12-month NSI prevalence [38, 41, 42, 44, 50,51,52,53, 55, 56]. Similarly, seven studies exclusively reported the lifetime prevalence of the NSI [37, 39, 40, 47, 54, 57, 58]. The remaining five articles have reported both the 12-month and lifetime needlestick injury prevalence [43, 45, 46, 48, 49, 59]. The quality of each of the included studies was evaluated using a nine-item risk of bias assessment tool [36]. All studies confirmed a low risk of bias (Table 1).

Table 1 Characteristics of the included studies in the meta-analysis of the prevalence of needlestick injury among healthcare workers in Ethiopia, 2019

Prevalence of needlestick injury

The prevalence of 12 months NSI among the Ethiopian HCWs was ranged from 13.2% in Amhara region [51] to 55.1% in the SNNP region [46]. The 12-month pooled prevalence of NSIs using the random effects model was 29.3% (95% CI 23.3–35.4; Fig. 2).

Fig. 2
figure 2

The 12-month prevalence of needlestick injuries among the Ethiopian healthcare works

The lifetime NSI prevalence was ranged from 18.6% in Amhara region [57] to 63.6% in the SNNP region [46]. The lifetime pooled prevalence of NSI among the Ethiopian HCWs was 43.6% (95% CI 35.3, 52.0; Fig. 3).

Fig. 3
figure 3

The lifetime pooled prevalence of needlestick injuries among the Ethiopian healthcare workers

Investigation of heterogeneity

Heterogeneity in meta-analysis is inevitable due to differences in study quality, methodology, sample size, and sampling technique among the studies. The included studies in this meta-analysis exhibited high level of heterogeneity (I2 = 95.7%, p < 0.001, and I2 = 97.3%, p < 0.01) for the 12-month and lifetime NSI prevalence estimates, respectively. So, the random effects model was used to adjust the observed variability. To identify the possible source of heterogeneity, subgroup analyses were carried out based on the year of publication, sampling technique, setting, facility type, and study groups. However, the level of heterogeneity remained high after subgroup analysis (Table 2). In addition, a sensitivity test was done to identify the influence of each study and the result indicated no influence on the pooled estimate while removing one study at a time from the analysis.

Table 2 Subgroup analysis of the prevalence of 12 months and lifetime needlestick injuries among the Ethiopian healthcare workers, 2019

In addition, we tried to investigate the possible sources of heterogeneity through meta-regression using sample size and year of publication as covariates. Meta-regression is a preferable method of investigating heterogeneity than subgroup analysis and has the advantage of running multiple covariates simultaneously [60]. The result of the meta-regression analysis indicated that the variables were not significantly associated with the presence of heterogeneity for both 12 months and lifetime prevalence estimates (Table 3). Further, a sensitivity analysis was conducted; however, in both cases, there was no single study influence on the pooled prevalence estimates of NSIs.

Table 3 A meta-regression analysis of factors for heterogeneity of the prevalence of needlestick injury among the healthcare workers in Ethiopia, 2019

Publication bias

The presence of publication bias was evaluated using funnel plots (Fig. 4) and Egger’s test. Each point in funnel plots represents a separate study, and asymmetrical distribution is evidence of publication bias [61]. First, studies’ effect sizes were plotted against their standard errors and the visual evaluation of the funnel plots indicated that there were publication biases for the 12-month prevalence estimate as the graph appears asymmetrical. The lifetime prevalence estimate was visually symmetrical. The subjective evidence of the publication bias was confirmed using Egger’s weighted regression statistics. According to the symmetry assumption, there was publication bias in the 12-month prevalence (p = 0.001), whereas the p value (0.222) was high for the lifetime prevalence estimate which declares the absence of heterogeneity among the included studies.

Fig. 4
figure 4

Funnel plots of the 12-month (a) and lifetime prevalence estimates (b) of the needlestick injury among the Ethiopian healthcare workers


Workplace health and safety is vital in every organization, particularly in healthcare settings. However, currently, HAIs and the emergence of drug-resistant organisms are increasingly challenging. Healthcare workers in developing countries are frequently exposed to work-related injuries and become at risk of infection. Needlestick injury is one of the ways that can expose HCWs to infectious agents.

The prevalence of NSIs differs from country to county even it can vary within a country. In Ethiopia, the 12-month NSI prevalence among the primary studies ranged from 13.1 [51] to 55.1% [46]. Similarly, the lifetime prevalence ranged between 18.6 [57] and 63.6% [46]. The lifetime prevalence range was slightly better than the finding from Pakistan (30 to 73%) [62]. Also, a systematic review from Iran has estimated the NSI prevalence to be between 10 and 84.3% [63]. This variation could be due to differences in awareness, training opportunity, degree of exposure to needles, availability, and utilization of protective devices recall bias and slight methodological differences among studies. The prevalence can vary from facility to facility depending on standards, workload overload, overcrowding, type of profession and level of skills, and accessibility and use of resources. Though the lifetime prevalence may not provide a reliable prevalence estimate due to recall bias, we tried to compare the result with other studies elsewhere.

In this study, the lifetime NSI pooled prevalence (43.6%) was comparable with studies found from India (40% and 45%) [64, 65], Iran (42.5%) [66], Nigeria (46.0%) [67], Saudi Arabia (46%) [68], and Pakistan (45%) [69]. However, very high prevalence estimates were found from Pakistan (77%) [70], Iran (76%) [71], and India (68.3%) [72]. The high prevalence of the 12-month NSI from the mentioned countries could be due to the lack of training on occupational health and infection prevention or it might be due to the lack of adequate and/or proper personal protective device. Regarding the 12 months of pooled prevalence, the result in the current study (28.8%) was higher than the finding from Nigeria (9.8%) [67]. Slightly comparable results were found from Germany (31.4%) [73] and India (34% and 35.3%) [65, 74]. However, high prevalence estimate was found from India (37.5%) [72] and Iran (54%) [71]. In most cases, the result was better than the prevalence estimates from other countries. There could be a number of factors that can determine needlestick injury prevalence among countries including training, accessibility and use of proper protective devices, workload overload, working hours, recall bias, consciousness of the HCWs, and infection prevention and control strategy difference which could be the possible reasons for the variability between the pooled prevalence in the current study and the prevalence estimate from elsewhere.

With respect to subgroup analysis, the pooled prevalence for both 12 months and lifetime estimates was decreased among studies conducted using none probability sampling techniques. Similarly, in both cases, the least prevalence was obtained from the Amhara region. This difference could be due to the lack of equal resource and/or training distribution among regions or work overload difference among the HCWs. Disappointingly for both cases, a high prevalence of NSIs was obtained among HCWs alone than studies conducted on both HCWs and cleaners. Although it is difficult to provide an empirical explanation for this unexpectable finding, one can ask if overqualification leads to ignorance for safety practices. On the other hand, the heterogeneity level was not significantly decreased among different subgroups. For this reason, the possible source of variabilities could be other sources.

The current study incurred a number of limitations that are worth considering. The included studies may not allow causal relationships to be established between the outcome and predictor variables. In addition, because the primary studies were conducted based on self-reported data, they might be prone to recall bias, and as a result, the findings from the studies could likely be underreported. Further, more than one third of the studies were obtained from one region (Amhara); however, there was no study obtained from the Benshangul Gumuz, Afar, and Tigray regions. This could probably affect the generalizability of the findings at a national level. Nevertheless, the findings can provide some kind of information on the occupational exposure of HCWs to NSI in Ethiopia. It will be also important for the design and development of the appropriate strategies and interventions to reduce the high pooled prevalence of NSI in Ethiopia.


The result of this study revealed that the pooled prevalence of NSI among Ethiopian HCWs was high. The inadequate allocations of HCWs among the health facilities might result in a high patient-to-staff ratio that leads to HCWs to work more hours than established standards and become more susceptible to injury. Therefore, the current study indicates the need to establish the safety and well-being of HCWs. The incidence of NSIs could be prevented by using protective equipment and safety-engineered devices. However, it could be more effective by reducing the factors that can contribute to the increased exposure of the HCWs through the allocation of adequate number of HCWs and implementing in-service training to promote standard precautions for preventing the transmission of blood-borne infections.

Availability of data and materials

All the data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.



Confidence interval


Degree of freedom


Hospital-acquired infection


Health center


Healthcare facilities


Healthcare workers




Needlestick injury


Self-administrative city


Southern nations, Nationalities, and People


World Health Organization


  1. World Health Organization (WHO): Healthcare worker safety: aide-memoire for a strategy to protect health workers from infection with bloodborne viruses. 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Prüss-Üstün A, Rapiti E, Hutin Y. Estimation of the global burden of disease attributable to contaminated sharps injuries among health- care workers. Am J Ind Med. 2005;48:482–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Leigh JP, Markis CA, Iosif AM, Romano PS. California’s nurse-to-patient ratio law and occupational injury. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2015;88:477–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Vose J, Mcadara J. Reducing scalpel injuries in the operating room. AORN J. 2009;90:867–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Leow JJ, Groen RS, Bae JY, Adisa CA, Kingham TP, Kushner AL. Scarcity of healthcare worker protection in eight low- and middle-income countries: surgery and the risk of HIV and other bloodborne pathogens. Trop Med Int Health. 2012;17:397–401.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. US Public Health Service. Guidelines for management of occupational exposure to HBV, HCV, and HIV and recommendations for post-exposure prophylaxis. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2001;50:1–52.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Adib-Hajbaghery M, Lotfi MS. Behavior of healthcare workers after injuries from sharp instruments. Trauma Mon. 2013;18:75–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Akeem BO, Abimbola A, Idowu AC. Needlestick injury pattern among health workers in primary health care facilities in Ilorin, Nigeria. Acad Res Int. 2011;1:419–27.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ghanei GR, Zahednezhad H, Shabani F, Hameh M, Ghahramani M, Farajzadeh M, et al. Needlesticks injuries and its related factors among nurses. Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res. 2014;27:21–9.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). 2011.

  11. Cui Z, Zhu J, Zhang X, Wang B, Li X. Sharp injuries: a cross-sectional study among health care workers in a provincial teaching hospital in China. Environ Health Prev Med. 2018;23:2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Rodrigues C. Needlestick injuries & the health care worker. Indian J Med Res. 2010;131:384–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Baghcheghi N, Koohestani H, Abedi A. Prevalence needlestick/sharps injuries among nursing student and related factor. Iran Occup Health J. 2011;7:31–9.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Adefolalu AO. Needle stick injuries and health workers: a preventable menace. Ann Med Health Sci Res. 2014;4:159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. WHO health care working safety 2014 who. available from and answer injection safety.

  16. Tadesse M, Tadesse T. Epidemiology of needlestick injuries among health-care workers in Awassa City, Southern Ethiopia. Trop Doct. 2010;40:111–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lee R. Occupational transmission of bloodborne diseases to healthcare workers in developing countries: meeting the challenges. J Hosp Infect Home. 2009;72:285–91.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Wilburn SQ, Eijkemans G. Preventing needlestick injuries among healthcare workers: a WHO–ICN collaboration. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2004;10:451–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gerberding JL. Management of occupational exposures to blood-borne viruses. N Engl J. 1995;332:444–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Gebriel YG, Tesfaye FF. Assessment of the safety of injections and related medical practices in health institutions at Sidama Zone, SNNPRS. J Clin Virol. 2006;36:217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Walsh SS, Pierce AM, Hart CA. Drug abuse: a new problem. Br Med J. 1987;295:526–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Adamu G, Abdullahi A. Common occupational health hazards amongst health care workers in a tertiary health institution in Bida, North-central Nigeria. Int J Biomed Res. 2017;8:01–6.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Geravandi S, Alavi SM, Yari AR, Yousefi F, Hosseini SA, Kamaei S, et al. Epidemiological aspects of needlestick injuries among health care workers in Razi Hospital Ahvaz, Iran. Arch Hyg Sci. 2016;5:85–91.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Sharma R, Rasania SK, Verma A, Singh S. Study of prevalence and response to needlestick injuries among health care workers in a tertiary care hospital in Delhi, India. Indian J Community Med. 2010;35:74.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Federl Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Ministry of Health and Health Related Indicators 2004 E.C 2011/12.

  26. Eshetie S, Gizachew M, Dagnew M, Kumera G, Woldie H, Ambaw F, et al. Multidrug resistant tuberculosis in Ethiopian settings and its association with previous history of anti-tuberculosis treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Infect Dis. 2017;17:219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Haylamicheal ID, Desalegne SA. A review of legal framework applicable for the management of healthcare waste and current management practices in Ethiopia. Waste Manag Res. 2012;30:607–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Health and Health Related Indicators. 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Abebe A. Study of hazardous biomedical waste management practices and development of hazardous biomedical waste management guidelines in Addis Ababa. Int J Sci Eng Sci. 2017;1:19–32.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Feysia B, Herbst CH, Lemma W, Soucat A. The health workforce in Ethiopia: addressing the remaining challenges (English). A World Bank study. Washington, DC: World Bank; 2012.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  31. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000097.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins PT, Rothstein HR. Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons. In: Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JP, Rothstein HR, editors. Introduction to meta-analysis: John Wiley & Sons; 2011. p. 2009.

  33. George J, Aban IB. An application of meta-analysis based on DerSimonian and Laird method. J Nucl Cardiol. 2016;23:690–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ades AE, Lu G, Higgins JP. The interpretation of random-effects meta-analysis in decision models. Medical Decis Making. 2005;25:646–54.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang J, Wu X, Lai W, Long E, Zhang X, Li W, et al. Prevalence of depression and depressive symptoms among outpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ open. 2017;7:e017173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. The Joanna Briggs Institute. Critical appraisal tools for use in JBI systematic reviews checklist for prevalence studies: The University of Adelaide. Available from:

  37. Beyene H, Desalegn B. Occupational risk factors associated with needle-stick injury among healthcare workers in Hawassa City, Southern Ethiopia. Occup Med Health Aff. 2014;2:2–5.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Mideksa L, Feyera T. Needle-stick injuries and contributing factors among healthcare workers in public health facilities in Jigjiga Zone, Eastern Ethiopia. World J Med Sci. 2014;11:490–6.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Desalegn Z, Gebreselassie S, Asemamaw Y. Epidemiology of needle stick-sharp injuries (NSSIs) and potential high risk exposures among health professionals in Ethiopia: neglected public health Concern. Am J Health Res. 2015;3:298–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Elfu BF. Prevalence and determinant factors for sharp injuries among Addis Ababa hospitals health professionals. Sci J Public Health. 2013;1:190–3.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kebede A, Gerensea H. Prevalence of needlestick injury and its associated factors among nurses working in public hospitals of Dessie town, Northeast Ethiopia, 2016. BMC Res Notes. 2018;11:2–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Bidira K, Woldie M, Nemera G. Prevalence and predictors of needlestick injury among nurses in public hospitals of Jimma Zone, South West Ethiopia. Int J Nurs Midwifery. 2014;6:90–6.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Reda A, Fisseha S, Mengistie B, Vandeweerd J. Standard precautions: occupational exposure and behavior of health care workers in Ethiopia. PLoS One. 2010;5:1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Kebede G, Molla M, Hardeep RS. Needlestick and sharps injuries among health care workers in Gondar city, Ethiopia. Saf Sci. 2012;50:1093–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Mekonnen R, Yosef H, Teklegiorgis K, Tesfaye F, Dagne I. Magnitude and impact of occupational related needle stick and sharp injuries and associated factors among health care workers in Dire Dawa, Eastern Ethiopia. Med Saf Glob Health. 2018;7:2–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Tadesse M, Meskele M, Tadesse AB. Needle-stick and sharps injuries among health care workers in Wolaita Zone, Southern Ethiopia. Med Saf Glob Health. 2016;5:2–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Teju WL, Anemaw W, Mekonen T, Mekonnen D. Prevalence of needle sticks injury and its associated factors among healthcare workers in Bahir Dar city health centres, Northwest Ethiopia. Int J Infect Control. 2015;11:1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Bekele T, Gebremariam A, Kaso M, Ahmed K. Factors associated with occupational needle stick and sharps injuries among hospital healthcare workers in Bale Zone, Southeast Ethiopia. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0140382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Azage M, Abeje G. Occupational exposure to blood and body fluids among health care professionals in Bahir Dar Town, Northwest Ethiopia. Saf Health Work. 2014;5:17–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Kaweti G, Abegaz T. Prevalence of percutaneous injuries and associated factors among healthcare workers in Hawassa referral and Adare District hospitals, Hawassa, Ethiopia, January 2014. BMC Public Health. 2015;16:8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Dilie A, Amare D, Gualu T. 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;2017:1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Alemayehu T, Worku A, Assefa N. Medical waste collectors in eastern Ethiopia are exposed to high sharp injury and blood and body fluids contamination. J Prev Infect Control. 2016;2:1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Aynalem F, Dejenie T. Assessment of prevalence and determinants of occupational exposure to HIV infection among healthcare workers in selected health institutions in Debre Berhan Town, North Shoa Zone, Amhara Region, Ethiopia, 2014. AIDS Res Treat. 2014;2014:1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Taddesse G, Tamire A, Bane A, Assefa D, Habteselasie A, Tesfaye M, et al. Burden of hepatitis-B infections and risk factors among healthcare workers in resource limited setting, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. EC Microbiology. 2016;4:722–31.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Reda AA, Vandeweerd JM, Syre TR, Egata G. HIV/AIDS and exposure of healthcare workers to body fluids in Ethiopia: attitudes toward universal precautions. J Hosp Infect. 2009;71:163–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Girma T. Knowledge, Attitude and practice of health care workers towards standard precaution in West Hararghe Hospitals, Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia. J Infect Dis Ther. 2015;3:221.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Yizengaw E, Getahun T, Geta M, Mulu W, Ashagrie M, Hailu D, et al. Sero-prevalence of hepatitis B virus infection and associated factors among health care workers and medical waste handlers in primary hospitals of North-west Ethiopia. BMC Res Notes. 2018;11:437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Adane A, Tesfahun A, Fentaw Y, Mitiku M, Getaneh A. Seroprevalence of hepatitis B virus and associated factors among health professionals in University of Gondar Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia. Adv Prev Med. 2019;2019:7136763.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Yasin J, Fisseha R, Mekonnen F, Yirdaw K. Occupational exposure to blood and body fluids and associated factors among health care workers at the University of Gondar Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia. Environ Health Prev Med. 2019;24:18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Hardy RJ, Thompson SG. Detecting and describing heterogeneity in meta analysis. Stat Med. 1998;17:841–56.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Egger M, Smith GD, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Br Med J. 1997;315:629–34.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Mehak P, Ruth G, Nasreen A. The prevalence and underreporting of needlestick injuries among dental healthcare workers in Pakistan: a systematic review. Int J Dent. 2018;2018:1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Fereidouni Z, Kameli Morandini M, Dehghan A, Jamshidi N, Najafi Kalyani M. The prevalence of needlestick injuries and exposure to blood and body fluids among iranian healthcare workers: a systematic review. Int J Med Rev. 2018;5:35–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Makade KG, Bhawnani D, Verma N, Dengani M. Knowledge and response of health care workers after needle-stick injury in a tertiary care hospital setting in tribal Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh, India. Int J Res Med Sci. 2017;5:816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Nagi ML, Kazmi ST, Saleem AA, Khan D, Afsar HH, Akhtar HS. Needle stick and sharps injuries; frequency and the factors contributing among health care workers of a tertiary care private hospital of Lahore. Prof Med J. 2017;24:1685–90.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Ghanei Gheshlagh R, Aslani M, Shabani F, Dalvand S, Parizad N. Prevalence of needlestick and sharps injuries in the healthcare workers of Iranian hospitals: an updated meta-analysis. Environ Health Prev Med. 2018;23:44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Livinus E, Terhemen JI. Needle-stick/sharps injuries among health care workers in a Tertiary hospital, Makurdi, Nigeria. J Health Sci. 2015;2:102–8.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Saulat J. Epidemiology of needlestick injuries among health care workers in a secondary care hospital in Saudi Arabia. Ann Saudi Med. 2005;25:233–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Afridi AA, Kumar A, Sayani R. Needle stick injuries–risk and preventive factors: a study among health care workers in tertiary care hospitals in Pakistan. Global J Health Sci. 2013;5:85.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Rais N, Jamil HM. Prevalence of needle stick injuries among health care providers. Int J Endorsing Health Sci Res. 2013;1:73–9.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Mehdi J, Akbar R, Naser H, Neda T, Ali S. Needle stick injuries and their related safety measures among nurses in a university hospital, Shiraz, Iran. Saf Health Work. 2016;7:72–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Archana L, Ashrof R, Meriton S, Christina M, Gladius J. A cross sectional study on needle stick and sharp injuries among health care providers in tertiary centers, Tamil Nadu. Int J Community Med Public Health. 2018;5:982–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Sabine W, Juliane J, Regina A, René G, Holger FR. Prevalence and prevention of needlestick injuries among health care workers in a German university hospital. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2008;81:347–54.

    Google Scholar 

  74. KP P. Epidemiology of needle-stick injuries in Mangalore. J Evol Med Dent Sci. 2012;1:128–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


Authors of this article would like to thank all the authors of the primary studies and biomedical staffs for review of the final manuscript.


This research did not receive any specific grant.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



TD and MG conceptualized the systematic review and meta-analysis, and searched and screened the articles based on the eligibility criteria. TD and KA extracted the data files from the full-text articles. TD, MG, and KA contributed to the analysis. MG wrote the draft manuscript. TD finalized the manuscript and communicated with the journal. All authors read and approved the final manuscript before submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Teshiwal Deress Yazie.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

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

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (, 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 ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yazie, T.D., Chufa, K.A. & Tebeje, M.G. Prevalence of needlestick injury among healthcare workers in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ Health Prev Med 24, 52 (2019).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: