Skip to main content

Epidemiology and risk factors of needlestick injuries among healthcare workers in Iran: a systematic reviews and meta-analysis

Abstract

Background

Occupational contact with blood and body fluids poses a significant risk to healthcare workers. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the epidemiology and risk factors affecting needlestick injuries (NSI) in healthcare personnel in Iran.

Methods

In March 2020, researchers studied six international databases such as Medline/PubMed, ProQuest, ISI/WOS, Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar for English papers and two Iranian databases (MagIran and SID) for Persian papers. Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist was used to assess quality of studies. The method of reporting was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement.

Results

A total of 43 articles were included in the analysis. Results showed that females (OR = 1.30, 95 % CI 1.06–1.58, P value = 0.009), younger age (OR = 2.75, 95 % CI 2.27–3.33, P value < 0.001, rotated shift workers (OR = 2.16, 95 % CI 1.47–3.15, P value < 0.001), not attending training courses (OR = 1.30, 95 % CI 1.07–1.56, P value = 0.006), working in the surgery ward (OR = 1.83, 95 % CI 1.33–2.50, P value < 0.001), less work experience (OR = 1.43, 95 % CI 1.04–1.95, P value = 0.025) apposed a greater risk factors for NSI among healthcare workers.

Conclusion

Based on the results of this review, factors such as young age, less work experience, work shift, and female gender are considered as strong risk factors for NSI injury in Iran. Preventive measures including education programs can reduce the burden of NSI among healthcare personnel.

Introduction

Needlestick injuries (NSI) are injuries caused by a needle head or a piece of broken ampule or other sharp object contaminated with blood or body secretions [1]. Occupational contact with blood and body fluids, followed by blood-borne infections, poses a significant risk to healthcare personnel [2]. At least 20 pathogenic pathogens can be transmitted following these injuries [3, 4]. Worldwide, about 25% of Hepatitis B virus (HBV) and Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections and about 2.5% of HIV infections occur among healthcare workers due to NSI [57]. According to the World Health Organization, about 3 million out of the 35 million healthcare workers are exposed to NSI each year [8]. The annual economic burden of NSI was estimated to be $302 million in Japan [9]. The annual incidence of NSI was estimated at 20.5 per 1000 nurses and 16 per 1000 physicians in Poland. Overall, there were approximately 13,576 cases of NSI damage in Poland in 2014 [10].

Ghanei Gheshlagh et al.’s study showed the prevalence of needle head injury among healthcare personnel in Iran is 42.5%, and this rate is higher in females than males (47 vs. 42%) [11]. NSI-related risk factors have not yet been properly identified in Iran. Studies have identified factors such as excessive and unnecessary injections, poor personnel training, female gender, high workloads, and excessive fatigue especially at nighttime as the most important causes of NSI [7, 1217]. Moreover, a systematic review found age, level of education, number of shifts per month, and history of training courses for individuals as factors influencing NSI. Several psychological problems in healthcare personnel are attributable to NSI that impose heavy costs on medical systems [18].

Many of NSIs are a source of infections are not reported due to fear of staff as well as lack of proper awareness. A few existing meta-analyses have only investigated the prevalence of NSI in medical personnel in Iran [19, 20]. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to investigate the epidemiology and risk factors affecting NSI in healthcare personnel in Iran.

Methods

Setting

The present study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of risk factors associated with NSI in medical personnel in Iran. The study was designed and conducted in 2020. The method of reporting the present study was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement.

Search strategy

Six international databases including Medline/PubMed (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov), ProQuest (https://www.proquest.com/index), ISI/WOS (http://www.webofknowledge.com), Scopus (http://www.scopus.com), Embase (http://www.embase.com), and Google Scholar (https://scholar.google.com) were searched for English papers and two Iranian databases (MagIran [http://www.magiran.com] and SID [http://www.sid.ir]) for Persian papers from inception to March 2020. The selected keywords for databases included Needlestick OR Needle-stick OR Sharp Injury OR needle* stick injuries* OR injur* OR needlestick injur* OR sharp* OR injur* AND Iran". Two researchers reviewed reports independently.

Study selection and data extraction

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria

The present study included only studies conducted in Iran and reported at least one factor affecting NSI.

Exclusion criteria

Studies without full text did not provide the information needed to enter the study and those that received a qualitative assessment score of less than 3.

Definitions of some terms

NSI: Needlestick injury for at least 12 months

Healthcare workers: A healthcare worker is one who delivers care and services to the sick and ailing either directly. The majority of people in this group are nurses.

Job stress: Job stress is a type of stress caused by conditions in the workplace affecting a person’s performance. General Nordic questionnaire for psychological and social factors at work was used for assessing job stress.

Quality assessment

The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist was used for quality assessment of included studies. This checklist examines the quality of cross-sectional studies. This checklist assesses 9 domains. The overall score above 7 indicates a high quality, between 4 and 6 shows medium quality, and below 3 shows poor quality.

Screening of studies

The initial search was conducted by two researchers (X and Y). Study screening, extraction of results, and quality assessment were performed independently by two researchers (A and B). If there was no agreement between the two researchers, the team leader (C) would announce the final opinion on that article.

Statistical analysis

The heterogeneity of the studies was investigated by Cochran’s test (with a significance level of less than 0.1) and its combination using I2 statistics (with a significance level greater than 50%). In case of model heterogeneity, random effects were used by variance image method, and in case of non-heterogeneity, the fixed effects model was used. The odds ratio (OR) index was used to combine results from different studies. This index provided the ability to combine studies that reported results in different ways. All analyses were performed by CMA statistical software version 2.

Results

Description of searched studies

A total of 312 reports were found initially. After removing duplicates, 251 reports remained for title and abstract review. In total, 59 studies met the inclusion criteria and entered into the second stage of evaluation. Eventually, 43 studies were included in the final analysis. It should be noted that the references to the published articles were also reviewed to add relevant studies. Reasons for exclusion were unrelated topic (191), unrelated study population [13], and repetitive results [4]. The flowchart of the studies are presented in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1
figure1

Flowchart of the included eligible studies in the systematic review

Description of the included studies

Characteristics of the included studies [15, 2164] are listed in Table 1.

Table 1 Descriptive data of included studies

Results of quality assessment

Eight studies were judged to have a high quality, and 35 had a medium quality.

Results of heterogeneity

Results of the study heterogeneity for each of the risk factors are shown in Table 2.

Table 2 Results of heterogeneity among included studies

Results of meta-analysis

Results for NSI risk factors including gender, age, education level, employment status, job stress, and marital status are as follows:

Gender

There was a significant difference between males and females experiencing NSI. Females had 30% more NSI experience than males (OR = 1.30, 95 % CI 1.06–1.58, P value = 0.009) (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2
figure2

Forest plot for relationship between gender and risk of NSI in Iran

Age

Healthcare workers under the age of 30 had significantly higher likelihood of experiencing NSI than those over the age of 30 (OR = 1.45, 95 % CI 1.07–1.95, P value = 0.015), as well as healthcare workers under the age of 35 compared with those over the age of 35 (OR = 2.75, 95 % CI 2.27–3.33, P value < 0.001) (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3
figure3

Forest plot for relationship between age and risk of NSI in Iran

Education level

There was no significant difference between healthcare workers in the NSI event based on the two levels of education of 12 years (OR = 0.98, 95 % CI 0.74–1.29, P value = 0.887) and 16 years (OR = 1.05, 95 % CI 0.74–1.48, P value = 0.781) (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4
figure4

Forest plot for relationship between education level and risk of NSI in Iran

There was no significant difference for NSI in terms of education level (OR = 0.98, 95 % CI 0.74–1.29, P value = 0.887; for 12 years education, and OR = 1.05, 95 % CI 0.74–1.48, P value = 0.781 for 18 years education) (Fig. 4).

Employment status

There was no significant difference for experiencing NSI between permanent healthcare workers with contractual workers (OR = 0.91, 95 % CI 0.60–1.35, P value = 0.645) (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5
figure5

Forest plot for relationship between employment status and risk of NSI in Iran

Job stress

The healthcare workers with severe job stress were 36% more likely to experience NSI than those with moderate stress, although it was not statistically significant (OR = 1.36, 95 % CI 0.89-2.08, P value = 0.151) (see Fig. 6).

Fig. 6
figure6

Forest plot for relationship between job stress and risk of NSI in Iran

Marital status

There was no significant difference between singles and married healthcare workers in the NSI event (OR = 1.02, 95 % CI 0.86–1.21, P value = 0.820) (Fig. 7).

Fig. 7
figure7

Forest plot for relationship between marital status and risk of NSI in Iran

Shift working

Workers with rotating shifts were significantly more likely to experience NSI compared to fixed time workers (OR = 2.16, 95 % CI 1.47–3.15, P value < 0.001). Moreover, night-shift workers had higher likelihood of experiencing NSI compared with day-shift workers, but the difference was non-significant (OR = 1.63, 95 % CI 0.82–3.22, P value = 0.161) (Fig. 8).

Fig. 8
figure8

Forest plot for relationship between shift working and risk of NSI in Iran

Attending in training course

Healthcare workers who did not attend the training courses were significantly 30% more likely to experience NSI than those who did the training (OR = 1.30, 95 % CI 1.07–1.56, P value = 0.006) (Fig. 9).

Fig. 9
figure9

Forest plot for relationship between attending in training course and risk of NSI in Iran

Hepatitis B vaccination status

Workers with incomplete vaccination against hepatitis B were 23% less likely to experience NSI than those who were fully vaccinated, although non-significantly (OR = 0.77, 95 % CI 0.41–1.41, P value = 0.400) (Fig. 10).

Fig. 10
figure10

Forest plot for relationship between hepatitis B vaccination status and risk of NSI in Iran

Ward

Healthcare workers in the surgery department were 83% more likely to have NSI than workers in the medical department, which was statistically significant (OR = 1.83, 95 % CI 1.33–2.50, P value < 0.001) (Fig. 11).

Fig. 11
figure11

Forest plot for relationship between ward in hospital and risk of NSI in Iran

Work experience

Healthcare workers with less than 10 years of experience were 43% more likely to have NSI than workers with more than 10 years of experience, which was statistically significant (OR = 1.43, 95 % CI 1.04–1.95, P value = 0.025). Moreover, healthcare workers with less than 5 years of experience had 35% higher chance of NSI than those with more than 5 years of experience, although the difference was not significant (OR = 1.35, 95 % CI 0.90–2.02, P value = 0.146) (Fig. 12).

Fig. 12
figure12

Forest plot for relationship between Work experience and risk of NSI in Iran

Summary of risk factors associated with NSI among HCW in Iran is presented in Fig. 13.

Fig. 13.
figure13

Summary of associated factors related to NSI in HCW in Iran

Publication bias

The results of the Egger (P = 0.737) and Begg test (P = 0.552) revealed no evidence of publication bias. The funnel plot for assessing publication bias is shown in Fig. 14.

Fig. 14
figure14

Funnel plot for assessing the risk of publication bias

Discussion

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the risk factors of NSI among healthcare workers in Iran. A number of risk factors associated with NSI have been identified. Factors such as female gender, younger age, work experience, job stress, work shift, education, and hospital ward were found to have a significant influence on the incidence of NSI.

Females are about 30% more likely to experience NSI injury than males. This might be due to various factors including stress and mental conflicts especially in the context of Iran as women have multiple roles in the home and workplace. Previous studies by Marawan Gabr et al., Teju Legesse et al., and Abimbola Oluwatosin et al. [6567] are inconsistent since they identified males are more likely than females to experience NSI. It seems that the occurrence of NSI in terms of gender cannot be judged with confidence.

Furthermore, age and work experience of healthcare workers were identified as important factors related to NSI. Health workers under 30 years were more likely (about 50%) to have NSI than workers over 30 years. In addition, workers with a work experience of less than 10 years were nearly twice as likely to be affected by NSI. Occupational accidents occur more among inexperienced HCWs than experienced counterparts. Reasons might include unfamiliarity with the work environment and work process, less training, less risk awareness, and lack of experience with the same accident (for her/himself or others). Similar reasons can be found in medical staff. The results of the present study showed that education is an effective factor, inexperienced and young staff receive less training than experienced staff. Tolesa Bekele et al. [68] found that HCWs under 30 years of age suffered from NSI almost twice as much as staff aged over 30 years. In a study by Marawan Gabr et al. [65], staff with less than 15 years of work experience were more likely to have NSI compared with staff with more work experience. In another study, Abimbola Oluwatosin et al. [67] found a significant association between age of staff and the incidence of NSI, where staff in the age group of 25 years and younger were more likely to have NSI than the age group of 46 and older. Similar findings have been reported in Rajput et al.’s study among nurses. Such studies also mentioned insufficient training and other factors mentioned above as the reason for more NSI in younger and less experienced staff.

Type of hospital ward showed a significant effect on the incident of NSI. Surgical ward posed a higher risk on the incident of NSI incident compared with other departments. In a similar vein, Marawan Gabr et al. [65] found the incidence of NSI in the surgical ward was significantly higher than the medical ward. Moreover, the most common injuries related to NSI occurred in the emergency department in two studies by Varun Goel et al. [7] and Tolesa Bekele et al. [68]. The high incidence of NSIs in the surgery and emergency wards might be caused by high levels of stress resulting from exposure to high-risk patients, work sensitivity, and the need for extreme attention to patients which in turn reduces the nurses’ focus during work and increases NSI likelihood.

Information about the type of healthcare profession in our study was limited. In Gańczak et al.’s study, being a doctor was associated with greater odds (OR = 4.2) of suffering from injures in surgical wards versus nurses [69]. A systematic review and meta-analysis by Bouya et al. [70] about job category and NSIs show that prevalence of NSIs was highest among dentists (59.1%). The prevalence of NSIs in other occupational groups was 42.8% for nurses, 46.4% for physicians, and 45.3% for nursing students [70]. On the other hand, in some studies, nurses are considered to have high risk of NSIs compared with other groups [71, 72].

The present review found that Job stress is likely to increase NSI incident. Although no significant difference was found between severe and moderate job stress, staff with higher levels of stress had 36% more chance to experience NSI. In a study by Dilie et al., they showed that almost half of the staff with job stress experienced NSI [73]. Job stress can affect workers’ physical, physiological, and psychological responses and, in turn, their mental, physical, or emotional activities leading to more mistakes during work and reduced work performance [74]. Consequently, NSIs are quite likely among staff with higher job stress.

The present review showed that staff with rotational and night shifts are more likely to have NSI than others. Similar to the present findings, Marawan Gabr et al. showed that night shifts increase NSI likelihood. They found that staff with more than 2 night shifts per month were more likely to experience NSI [65]. One possible explanation could be the changes in body's natural physiological cycle as it is related to stress and NSIs. However, in a non-aligned study, Kasatpibal et al. found that most NSIs for nurses in the surgery rooms occurred during morning shifts. This is also justified by the high workload of nurses (e.g., surgeries) in the morning shift [75]. Therefore, it seems that the incident of NSIs might depend on the workplace situation and job type.

Training courses were also identified as one of the key factors affecting the occurrence of NSIs. The incidence of NSIs was shown to be approximately one third (30%) in those who took training courses. In a study by Kasatpibal et al. [75], the effect of training with and without practicing on the incidence of NSIs was assessed. Staff who had training without practicing were significantly (about 53%) more likely to experience NSI. In another study evaluating the effect of attendance in training sessions, staff who did not attend the training sessions suffered more NSIs than staff who attended training [65]. On-job training can play a crucial role in increasing their performance and reducing job risks due to being in a clinical environment and direct exposure to risk factors. For this reason, in various studies, trained staff were less likely to face occupational hazards and injuries. These cases show a direct impact of clinical education on staff’s performance and NSI incident.

Strengths and limitations

Previous meta-analyses conducted in Iran have estimated the prevalence of NSIs. However, the present study aimed to estimate the risk factors of NSI. Two limitations of this review were the lack of detailed information about the type of healthcare professions and the content of training packages.

Recommendations

It is recommended that healthcare authorities plan regular training programs for the prevention of NSIs in healthcare workers. In order to improve these training methods, staff evaluation should be done in different time periods, and possible mistakes should be corrected. Other recommendations are to establish uniform policies across all hospitals about the management of NSIs and performing periodic practical and verbal exams on personnel knowledge, attitude, and performance regarding prevention of NSIs.

Conclusions

In conclusion, this review identified key risk factors including young age, less work experience, work shift, and female gender for NSIs in Iran. Preventive activities based on known risk factors can reduce the burden of NSI on healthcare personnel.

Abbreviations

HCW:

Health-care workers

NSI:

Needlestick injuries

References

  1. 1.

    Himmelreich H, Rabenau HF, Rindermann M, Stephan C, Bickel M, Marzi I, et al. The management of needlestick injuries. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2013;110(5):61–7. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2013.0061.

  2. 2.

    Beltrami EM, Williams IT, Shapiro CN, Chamberland ME. Risk and management of blood-borne infections in health care workers. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2000;13(3):385–407. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.13.3.385.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Marusic V, Markovic-Denic L, Djuric O, Protic D, Dubljanin-Raspopovic E. Knowledge about blood-borne pathogens and the prevalence of needle stick injuries among medical students in Serbia. Zdr Varst. 2017;56(3):179–84. https://doi.org/10.1515/sjph-2017-0024.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Tarantola A, Abiteboul D, Rachline A. 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):367–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2004.11.011.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Coppola N, De Pascalis S, Onorato L, Calò F, Sagnelli C, Sagnelli E. Hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus infection in healthcare workers. World J Hepatol. 2016;8(5):273–81. https://doi.org/10.4254/wjh.v8.i5.273.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Joukar F, Mansour-Ghanaei F, Naghipour MR, Hassanipour S. Knowledge, distribution and risk factors of hepatitis B and C infection in high-risk groups in Guilan Province. Iran. Hepat Mon. 2018;18(8):e65870.

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Goel V, Kumar D, Lingaiah R, Singh S. Occurrence of needlestick and injuries among health-care workers of a tertiary care teaching hospital in North India. J Lab Physicians. 2017;9(1):20–5. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-2727.187917.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Pavithran VK, Murali R, Krishna M, Shamala A, Yalamalli M, Kumar AV. Knowledge, attitude, and practice of needle stick and sharps injuries among dental professionals of Bangalore, India. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2015;5(5):406–12. https://doi.org/10.4103/2231-0762.165932.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Kunishima H, Yoshida E, Caputo J, Mikamo H. Estimating the national cost burden of in-hospital needlestick injuries among healthcare workers in Japan. PLoS One. 2019;14(11):e0224142.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Garus-Pakowska A, Górajski M. Epidemiology of needlestick and sharp injuries among health care workers based on records from 252 hospitals for the period 2010-2014, Poland. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):634.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    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 Preventive Med. 2018;23(1):44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Saadeh R, Khairallah K, Abozeid H, Al Rashdan L, Alfaqih M, Alkhatatbeh O. Needle stick and sharp injuries among healthcare workers: a retrospective six-year study. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J. 2020;20(1):e54–62. https://doi.org/10.18295/squmj.2020.20.01.008.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Singru SA, Banerjee A. Occupational exposure to blood and body fluids among health care workers in a teaching hospital in mumbai, India. Indian J Commun Med. 2008;33(1):26–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Floreani A, Baldo V, Cristofoletti M, Renzulli G, Valeri A, Zanetti C, et al. Long-term persistence of anti-HBs after vaccination against HBV: an 18 year experience in health care workers. Vaccine. 2004;22(5-6):607–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2003.09.001.

  15. 15.

    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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2015.07.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Nasiri A, Balouchi A, Rezaie-Keikhaie K, Bouya S, Sheyback M, Rawajfah OA. Knowledge, attitude, practice, and clinical recommendation toward infection control and prevention standards among nurses: A systematic review. Am J Infect Control. 2019;47(7):827–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2018.11.022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Sahiledengle B, Tekalegn Y, Woldeyohannes D, Quisido BJE. Occupational exposures to blood and body fluids among healthcare workers in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ Health Prev Med. 2020;25(1):58.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Motaarefi H, Mahmoudi H, Mohammadi E, Hasanpour-Dehkordi A. Factors associated with needlestick injuries in health care occupations: a systematic review. Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR. 2016;10(8):IE01–IE4. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2016/17973.8221.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Rezaei S, Hajizadeh M, Zandian H, Fathi A, Nouri B. Period prevalence and reporting rate of needlestick injuries to nurses in Iran: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Research in nursing & health. 2017;40(4):311–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.21801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Sayehmiri K, Mohammadi E, Mohammadi I, Sayehmiri F. Epidemiology of needle sticks and sharps injuries in healthcare workers in Iran: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Iran Occupational Health. 2014;11(5):93–103.

  21. 21.

    Abdi M, Najafipour S, Hamidizade S, Jamali F, Pournoroz N, et al. jumsjmj. 2009;7(3):30–8.

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Adib-Hajbaghery M, Lotfi MS. Behavior of healthcare workers after injuries from sharp instruments. Trauma monthly. 2013;18(2):75–80. https://doi.org/10.5812/traumamon.12779.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Askarian M, Malekmakan L. The prevalence of needle stick injuries in medical, dental, nursing and midwifery students at the university teaching hospitals of Shiraz, Iran. Indian journal of medical sciences. 2006;60(6):227–32. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5359.25904.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Askarian M, Shaghaghian S, Gillen M, Assadian O. Body fluid exposure in nurses of Fars Province, southern Iran. Arch Iranian Med. 2008;11(5):515–21.

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Askarian M, Shaghaghian S, McLaws ML. Needlestick injuries among nurses of Fars province, Iran. Annals of epidemiology. 2007;17(12):988–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2007.07.106.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Azadi A, Anoosheh M. Needlestick injuries reporting among clinical nurses. IJN. 2007;20(49):7–14.

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Azadi A, Anoosheh M, Delpisheh A. Frequency and barriers of underreported needlestick injuries amongst Iranian nurses, a questionnaire survey. J Clin Nurs. 2011;20(3-4):488–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03252.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Bagheri Hosseinabadi M, Khanjani N, Etemadinezhad S, Samaei SE, Raadabadi M, Mostafaee M. The associations of workload, individual and organisational factors on nurses’ occupational injuries. J Clin Nurs. 2019;28(5-6):902–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14699.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Balouchi A, Shahdadi H, Ahmadidarrehsima S, Rafiemanesh H. The frequency, causes and prevention of needlestick injuries in nurses of Kerman: a cross-sectional study. J Clin Diagnostic Res. 2015;9(12):Dc13–5.

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Bijani B, Azimiyan J. Epidemiology and risk factors of needle stick injuries among nurses in Bou-Ali Sina teaching hospital, Qazvin. J shahid beheshti nursing and midwifery. 2012;22(78):1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Bijani B, Sotudehmanesh S, Mohammadi N. Epidemiological features of needle stick injuries among nursing staff; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Ebrahimi H, Khosravi A. Needlestick injuries among nurses. J Res Health Sci. 2007;7(2):56–62.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Ehsani SR, Mohammadnejad E, Hadizadeh MR, Mozaffari J, Ranjbaran S, Deljo R, et al. Epidemiology of needle sticks and sharp injuries among nurses in an Iranian teaching hospital. Arch Clin Infect Dis. 2012;8(1):27–30. https://doi.org/10.5812/archcid.14409.

  34. 34.

    Galougahi MH. Evaluation of needle stick injuries among nurses of Khanevadeh Hospital in Tehran. Iranian J Nurs Midwifery Res. 2010;15(4):172–7.

    Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Ghanei Gheshlagh R, Zahednezhad H, Shabani F, Hameh M, Ghahramani M, Farajzadeh M, et al. Needle sticks injuries and its related factors among nurses. Iran J Nursing. 2014;27(89):21–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Ghannad MS, Majzoobi MM, Ghavimi M, Mirzaei M. Needlestick and sharp object injuries among health care workers in Hamadan Province, Iran. J Emerg Nurs. 2012;38(2):171–5; quiz 202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jen.2011.01.009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Ghasemzadeh I, Kazerooni M, Davoodian P, Hamedi Y, Sadeghi P. Sharp injuries among medical students. Global J Health Sci. 2015;7(5):320–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Gholami A, Borji A, Lotfabadi P, Asghari A. Risk factors of needlestick and sharps injuries among healthcare workers. Int J Hospital Res. 2013;2(1):31–8.

    Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Gholami A, Salarilak S, Alinia T, Nejad RR. Study of needle stick injuries among health care workers at teaching hospitals in Urmia. Iranian J Epidemiol. 2010;6(3):57–61.

    Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Hajivandi A, Ahmadi B, Rezaeeshiri A, Ramavandi B. A survey on the sharp and cutting wastes injury in nurses of the Bushehr city hospitals in the year 1392. J Urmia Nurs Midwifery Faculty. 2015;13(6):490–7.

    Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Hashemi SH, Torabian S, Mamani M, Moazen DS. The prevalence of needlestick and sharps injuries among health care workers in Hamadan, Iran. UMSHA. 2012;18(4):41–6.

    Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Heidari M, Shahbazi S. Prevalence of needle sticks exposure in operation room's staff of Borujen & Lordegan hospitals - 2010-2011. Commun Health J. 2010;5(1):32–7.

    Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Mohammadnejad I, Esfandbad M. Injuries of sinking sharp objects and the rate of reporting in emergency nurses of Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Iranian J Infect Dis Tropical Med. 2010;15(48):49–54.

    Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Mohammadnejad I, Esfandbad M, Ehsani SR, Deljoo R. Epidemiological aspects of occupational exposure to sharp and winning objects in nurses. Iranian J Infect Dis Tropical Med. 2009;14(45):47–50.

    Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Izadi N, Chavoshi F, Sadeghi M. Needlestick and sharps injuries among the personnel of Baharlou Hospital in Tehran, Iran. Jundishapur J Health Sci. 2015;7(4):e30649.

  46. 46.

    Lakbala P, Sobhani G, Lakbala M, Inaloo KD, Mahmoodi H. Sharps injuries in the operating room. Environmental health and preventive medicine. 2014;19(5):348–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12199-014-0401-y.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Lotfi R, Gashtasbi A. Needle stick and sharps injuries and its risk factors among health center personnel (Astara, Iran, 2006). Babol-Jbums. 2008;10(4):71–7.

    Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Mahmoudi N, Sepandi M, Mohammadi AS, Masoumbeigi H. Epidemiological aspects of needle stick injuries among nurses in a military hospital. Work. 2015;12(5.64):9 41-4.99.

    Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Mehrdad R, Atkins EH, Sharifian SA, Pouryaghoub G. Psychosocial factors at work and blood-borne exposure among nurses. Int J Occupational Environmental Med. 2014;5(1):32–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Mirzaei-Alavijeh M, Jalilian F, Karami-Matin B, Ghaderi A, Mahboubi M, Janizadeh R, et al. Needle-stick and medication errors in emergency nurses are due to their job stresses? A descriptive study in Kermanshah Hospitals, Iran. J Biol Today's World. 2014;3:185–8.

    Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Mohammadi N, Allami A, Mohamadi RM. Percutaneous exposure incidents in nurses: knowledge, practice and exposure to hepatitis b infection. Hepatitis Monthly. 2011;11(3):186–90.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. 52.

    Moradi A, Mostafavi E, Moradi A. The prevalence and causes of needle stick injuries among the primary health care workers of Bahar city, Hamadan Province. Iran Occupational Health. 2010;7(2):39–42.

    Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

    NA JJ, Shasti M, Izadi M, Ranjbar R, Ghasemi M. Evaluation of frequency of exposure to medical sharp devices among nurses of a university hospital. J Mil Med. 2008;10(2):119–28.

    Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Nazmieh H, Najaf-Yarandi A, Janmohammadi S, Hosseini F. Assessment of the injuries caused by sharp instruments in the health workers of university hospitals, in Yazd. IJN. 2005;18(43):49–59.

    Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Nejadrahim R, Gharahughi N, Sistanizade M. Needlestick Injuries in the Health Care Workers of Urmia Educational Hospitals. UNMF. 2005;3(2):0.

    Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    Rakhshani F, Heidari M, Barati S. Prevalence of needlestick injuries among the healthcare professionals in Zahedan Medical Sciences University. Iranian J Epidemiol. 2009;4(3):87–91.

    Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Rezaei S, Rabi Rad N, Tamizi Z, Fallahi Khoshknab M, Mohamad NE. An Investigation into occupational hazards faced by nurses in paediatrics hospitals of Tehran University of Medical Sciences, 2006-2009. Int J Community Based Nurs Midwifery. 2013;1(4):200–7.

    Google Scholar 

  58. 58.

    Safaeian A, Tavakolifard N, Zand S. Risk factors assessment of needle-stick injury among the healthcare workers of Alzahra Hospital, Isfahan, Iran. J Isfahan Med School. 2019;36(506):1463–71.

    Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    Salmanzadeh S, Rahimi Z, Goshtasbipour M, Meripoor M. The prevalence of needle-stick injuries among healthcare workers in Dasht-e-Azadegan, Southern West of Iran. Int J Pharmaceutical Res Allied Sci. 2016;5(2):417–22.

    Google Scholar 

  60. 60.

    Sharifian A, Aminian O, Afshari SL. Occupational stress and its relationship with needle stick injury among emergency department personnel. Occup Med Quarterly J. 2012;3(4):7–13.

    Google Scholar 

  61. 61.

    Shiva F, Sanaei A, Shamshiri AR, Ghotbi F. Survey of needle-stick injuries in paediatric health personnel of 5 university hospitals in Tehran. JPMA The Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association. 2011;61(2):127–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. 62.

    Shoghli A, Mousavi Nasab N, Ghorchian F, Masoumi H, Momtazi S. Study of theneedle sticks injury (NSI) among the Zanjan educational hospitals staff. J Adv Med Biomed Res. 2013;21(85):131–41.

    Google Scholar 

  63. 63.

    Tirgar A, F G. A survey on needlestick injuries and related occupational factors among the Nurses. JHSW. 2012;1(2):31–8.

    Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    Vahedi MS, Ahsan B, Ardalan M, Shahsavari S. Prevalence and causes of needle stick injuries, in medical personnels of Kurdistan University’s hospitals and dealing with such injuries due to contaminated sharp tools in 1383. HBI_Journals. 2006;11(2):43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  65. 65.

    Gabr HM, El-Badry AS, Younis FE. Risk factors associated with needlestick injuries among health care workers in Menoufia Governorate, Egypt. The international journal of occupational and environmental medicine. 2018;9(2):63–8. https://doi.org/10.15171/ijoem.2018.1156.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. 66.

    Legesse W, Anemaw W, Mekonen T, Nigus D. Prevalence of needle sticks injury and its associated factors among health care workers in Bahir Dar city health centers, Northwest Ethiopia. Int J Infect Control. 2015;11(2):1–7.

  67. 67.

    Oluwatosin OA, Oladapo MM, Asuzu MC. Needlestick injuries among health care workers in Ondo State, Nigeria. Int J Med Public Health. 2016;6(1):31–4.

  68. 68.

    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(10):e0140382. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140382.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. 69.

    Gańczak M, Bohatyrewicz A, Korzeń M, Karakiewicz B. The comparison of sharps injuries reported by doctors versus nurses from surgical wards in the context of the prevalence of HBV, HCV and HIV infections. Polski przeglad chirurgiczny. 2012;84(4):190–5. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10035-012-0031-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. 70.

    Bouya S, Balouchi A, Rafiemanesh H, Amirshahi M, Dastres M, Moghadam MP, et al. Global prevalence and device related causes of needle stick injuries among health care workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Global Health. 2020;86(1):35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. 71.

    Safety O, Administration H. Facts about hospital worker safety. Washington, DC: OSHA; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  72. 72.

    Elseviers MM, Arias-Guillén M, Gorke A, Arens HJ. Sharps injuries amongst healthcare workers: review of incidence, transmissions and costs. Journal of renal care. 2014;40(3):150–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/jorc.12050.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. 73.

    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. Journal of Environmental and Public Health. 2017;2017:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/2438713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. 74.

    Butts MM, Vandenberg RJ, DeJoy DM, Schaffer BS, Wilson MG. Individual reactions to high involvement work processes: investigating the role of empowerment and perceived organizational support. J Occup Health Psychol. 2009;14(2):122–36. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014114.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. 75.

    Kasatpibal N, Whitney JD, Katechanok S, Ngamsakulrat S, Malairungsakul B, Sirikulsathean P, et al. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2015.07.028.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Dr. Reza Daryabeygi at the Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia for his invaluable assistance in English editing this manuscript.

Availability of supporting data

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its supporting information files.

Funding

None

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

GP and SH: concept development (provided idea for the research). SH, MJ, GP, and MS: design (planned the methods to generate the results). GP and SH: supervision (provided oversight, responsible for organization and implementation, writing of the manuscript). HR, MM, and RT: data collection/processing (responsible for experiments, patient management, organization, or reporting data). MS, MF and SH: analysis/interpretation (responsible for statistical analysis, evaluation, and presentation of the results). SH and MF: literature search (performed the literature search). All authors: writing (responsible for writing a substantive part of the manuscript)

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gholamhossein Pourtaghi.

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 licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hassanipour, S., Sepandi, M., Tavakkol, R. et al. Epidemiology and risk factors of needlestick injuries among healthcare workers in Iran: a systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Environ Health Prev Med 26, 43 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12199-021-00965-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Needlestick injuries
  • Healthcare workers
  • Systematic review
  • Meta-analysis
  • Iran
\