Pauline Irumba, Enos Mirembe Masereka , Nathan Kakongi, Herbert Mugerwa , Emmanuel Kimera, Charles Rugumayo, Robert Kamukama, Apuulison David Friday, Brenda Nabawanuka

Burden and Risk Factors for Sharp Injuries among Healthcare Workers in a Ugandan Tertiary Hospital: a Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction

Burden and risk factors for sharp injuries among healthcare workers in a ugandan tertiary hospital: a cross-sectional study. Investigates the high prevalence (40.14%) and risk factors for sharp injuries among healthcare workers in a Ugandan tertiary hospital. Highlights lack of training and stress as key issues.

Abstract

Introduction. Uganda’s efforts for sharps handling, and their waste management are restrained due to shortage of equipment and supplies resorting to alternatives that may not meet standards. The aim of this study was to provide a current detailed account of the prevalence of sharp injuries, and independent risk factors for these injuries among healthcare workers in a resource limited setting. Methods. A hospital based cross sectional study was conducted among healthcare professionals offering care in a 333-bed capacity tertiary care facility. A self-administered questionnaire was used. Prevalence, and sociodemographic characteristics were determined using descriptive analysis. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analyses were conducted to explore the independent factors associated with risk of sharp injuries. Results. 147 health professionals participated in this study, and majority (57.14%) were females. The median age in years was 38.48 with an interquartile range of (30.87-47.35). The period prevalence of sharps injuries was 40.14% (1 in 3), and health professionals with at least one training in sharp handling, and disposal a year were less likely to have sharps injuries that year (aOR=0.1, 95% CI=0.01-0.48, p=0.006). Work related stress increased the odds of sharps injuries (aOR=4.3, 95% CI=1.2-9.8, p=0.005). Discussion. The overall prevalence of sharp injuries is high. Multidimensional factors including psychological stress, limited flexibility in hospital policies, and less training on sharps handling and disposal every year were associated with sharps injuries. Feasible hospital interventions including simulation-based training, digital education on sharps handling, and disposal should be implemented by hospital administration. While this training on sharps handling, and disposal may be important, its efficacy should be ascertained through repeated studies. Support through allocation of resources, and capacity building from ministry of health, and partners could be of help.

Review

This study critically examines the burden and risk factors for sharp injuries among healthcare workers in a Ugandan tertiary hospital, addressing a significant occupational health and safety concern in a resource-limited setting. The research is highly relevant, given the persistent challenges in sharps handling and waste management in such environments, and the serious implications of these injuries, including the risk of blood-borne pathogen transmission. The findings reveal an alarming period prevalence of 40.14%, indicating that nearly one in three healthcare professionals experienced a sharp injury, highlighting the urgent need for effective interventions. The methodology, a hospital-based cross-sectional study, is well-suited for determining prevalence and identifying associated factors within a specific population. A notable strength is the study's focus on a resource-constrained context, providing valuable data that can inform localized interventions. The multivariate logistic regression analysis effectively identified key independent risk factors: annual training in sharps handling and disposal was found to be highly protective (aOR=0.1), while work-related stress significantly increased the odds of experiencing sharp injuries (aOR=4.3). These statistically robust findings provide clear, actionable targets for hospital administration and policy-makers, underscoring the importance of both practical training and psychological support. While providing valuable insights, the study's limitations should be considered. The self-administered questionnaire approach, though practical, may introduce recall bias or social desirability bias, potentially influencing the accuracy of reported incidents and risk factor perceptions. Additionally, the cross-sectional design inherently limits the ability to infer causality, only establishing associations. Future research could benefit from larger, multi-center studies, potentially employing prospective designs to track injury incidence and the effectiveness of interventions. Nevertheless, this research makes a substantial contribution by quantifying the problem and identifying modifiable risk factors in a vulnerable healthcare workforce, providing a crucial evidence base for targeted prevention strategies and resource allocation in similar settings.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.