Dataset Information

Occupational exposures to blood and body fluids among healthcare workers in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT: Background Occupational exposure to blood and body fluids is a major risk factor for the transmission of blood-borne infections to healthcare workers. There are several primary studies in Ethiopia yet they might not be at the national level to quantify the extent of occupational blood and body fluid exposures (splash of blood or other body fluids into the eyes, nose, or mouth) or blood contact with non-intact skin among the healthcare workers. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of occupational blood and body fluid exposure of healthcare workers in Ethiopia. Methods PubMed, Science Direct, Hinari, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane library were systematically searched; withal, the references of appended articles were also checked for further possible sources. The Cochrane Q test statistics and I2 tests were used to assess the heterogeneity of the included studies. A random-effects meta-analysis model was used to estimate the lifetime and 12-month prevalence of occupational exposure to blood and body fluids among healthcare workers in Ethiopia. Results Of the 641 articles identified through the database search, 36 studies were included in the final analysis. The estimated pooled lifetime and 12-month prevalence on occupational exposure to blood and body fluids among healthcare workers were found to be at 54.95% (95% confidence interval (CI), 48.25–61.65) and 44.24% (95% CI, 36.98-51.51), respectively. The study identified a variation in healthcare workers who were exposed to blood and body fluids across Ethiopian regions. Conclusion The finding of the present study revealed that there was a high level of annual and lifetime exposures to blood and body fluids among healthcare workers in Ethiopia.

SUBMITTER: Sahiledengle B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7533038 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare workers (HCW) are exposed to infectious agents within biological materials including blood, tissues, other body fluids and on medical supplies, contaminated surfaces within the care delivery environment. Trends in occupational injuries are influenced by the level of awareness and observance of standard precautions (SP) among HCWs. This study aimed to assess the level of awareness of SP, exposure to body fluids, reporting pattern and management among HCWs in a Referral Hospital.MethodsThe present hospital-based cross-sectional study was carried out from 1st November 2020 to 31st May 2021. The exhaustive sampling method was used and a total of 120 consenting HCWs were invited to participate. A self-administered questionnaire addressed questions related to knowledge, experience, circumstances of exposure, reporting, management of occupational exposure to body fluids, hepatitis B vaccination status. Data were analyzed using R Statistic version 4.3.1. A p-value < 0.05 was considered significant.ResultsOut of the 120 participating HCWs, 104 (86.7%) reported at least one accidental exposure to body fluids over the last year. Men (aOR = 4.19; p = 0.277) and HCWs aged 35 and over (aOR = 4.11; p = 0.114) were more at risk for AEB even though the difference was not statistically significant. Nurses/midwives (aOR = 65.9; p-value = 0.0005) and cleaners (aOR = 14.7; p-value = 0.0438) faced the highest risk of exposure. Lack of knowledge (79%) and patient agitation (49%) were the most reported reasons for exposure. Half of the participants (53%) reported that they used a personal protective equipment during care. Face mask (59.2%) and gowns (30.8%) were the most commonly used PPE. Most HCWs (62%) did not report AEB. Half of the affected HCWs (50.8%) received a course of post-exposure antiretroviral therapy. Few HCWs (4.2%) were fully immunized against Hepatitis B.ConclusionsMost HCWs reported an accidental exposure to body fluids over the last year. Midwives and nurses were disproportionally affected socio-professional groups. Two-thirds of the AEB were undeclared. Only half of the participants reported using PPE systematically. Hepatitis B vaccination coverage was low. There is need to strengthen the observance of standard precautions, including preventive vaccination and the systematic reporting and management of AEB.

Project description:ObjectiveThe occupational risk for Legionella infection among dental healthcare workers (DHCWs) is conjectured because of the risk of routine inhalation of potentially contaminated aerosols produced by the dental instruments. Nevertheless, occupational epidemiology studies are contrasting. This meta-analysis assessed the level of scientific evidence regarding the relative occupational risk for Legionella infection among DHCWs.MethodsLiterature search was performed without time and language restrictions, using broad data banks (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, GOOGLE Scholar) and generic keywords ('legionella' AND 'dent*'). Analytical cross-sectional studies comparing prevalence of high serum Legionella antibody levels in DHCWs and occupationally unexposed individuals were considered. The relative occupational risk was assessed through prevalence ratio (PR) with 95%?CI. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed (Cochran's Q test) and was used to choose the meta-analytic method. Study quality (modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale) and publication bias (Begg and Mazumdar's test, Egger and colleagues' test, trim and fill R0 method) were assessed formally and considered for the sensitivity analysis. Sensitivity analysis to study inclusion, subgroup analyses (dental staff categories; publication year, before vs after 1998, ie, 5?years after the release by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of the infection control guidelines in dental healthcare setting) were performed.ResultsSeven studies were included (2232 DHCWs, 1172 occupationally unexposed individuals). No evidence of publication bias was detected. The pooled PR estimate was statistically non-significant at 95% level (1.7; 95%?CI 0.8 to 3.2), study-quality adjustment did not change the PR considerably (PR, 1.5; 95%?CI 0.5 to 4.1). PR was statistically significant before 1998 and no longer significant after 1998. Subgroup analysis according to DHCW categories was inconclusive.ConclusionsThere is no scientific evidence that DHCWs are at high occupational risk. The differences between former and recent studies could be due to different characteristics of municipal water systems and the infection control guideline dissemination.

Dataset Information

Occupational exposures to blood and body fluids among healthcare workers in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets