A Four-Year Review of Occupational Injuries among Health Care Workers in a Tertiary Care Hospital

Abstract

Background

In the demanding health care sector, occupational injuries are prevalent and diverse, affecting health care workers' physical health and quality of life, and resulting in disability. There is a dearth of studies that comprehensively assessed diverse occupational injuries by using registered data over an extended period.

Objectives

Thus, this study aimed to investigate the burden of work-related injury in a tertiary care hospital.

Patients and Methods

This study examined data collected from January 2017 to December 2020 at Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare, a tertiary care hospital in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. A total of 187 health care workers with occupational injuries, registered in the Exposure Prevention Information Network (EPINet), were considered in the analysis.

Results

Blood and body fluids exposures (BBFEs) accounted for 56.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 52.34, 59.89) of all occupational injuries, while falls, slips, trips, and collisions made up 15% (95% CI: 12.47, 18.73). Needlestick injuries accounted for 48.1 and 84.9% of all occupational and BBFE injuries, respectively. The majority (38.7%) of BBFE happened at the operating theaters, followed by the emergency room (28.3%). Note that 60.4% of all injuries and 57.3% of BBFEs were experienced by nurses. The highest number of injuries was documented in 2019 and 2020.

Conclusion

BBFEs and falls, slips, trips, and collisions were the most common occupational injuries, with nurses being the most affected. Nearly half of these incidents involve needlestick injuries, highlighting the need for strict safety protocols, regular training, use of personal protective equipment, patient handling protocols, and improved ergonomics.

Keywords

occupational injuries - health care workers - hospital - EPINet - Saudi Arabia

Introduction

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) describes work-related injuries (WRIs) and illnesses as a wide range of incidents, repetitive motion injuries, exposure to hazardous substances, and illnesses induced by work activities.[1] [2] In the demanding environment of health care, occupational injuries are unfortunately common and varied. Reports identified the health care industry as a major source of workplace injuries, surpassing construction and manufacturing.[3] Common workplace accidents in the health care industry are blood and body fluid exposures (BBFEs), musculoskeletal injuries, needlestick and sharps injuries, violence-related injuries, falling down injuries, and electrical injuries.[4] Health care workers (HCWs) in low- and middle-income countries face biological, psychosocial, ergonomic, and chemical hazards, including bloodborne pathogens, workplace violence, burnout, and musculoskeletal disorders.[5]

Occupational exposure to BBFs poses a considerable risk to HCWs, increasing the risk of infections transmitted by blood such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV), and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.[6] [7] [8] These injuries can be caused by mucocutaneous injury (eyes, nose, mouth), nonintact skin exposure, or percutaneous injury via infected needles or sharp objects.[7] [9] [10] In addition, HCWs may be exposed to percutaneous injuries or contact with potentially infectious body fluids, such as blood, tissue, or other fluids, which can occur through chapped, abraded, or dermatitis-afflicted skin.[11] HCWs who perform invasive operations utilizing sharp instruments or come into touch with a patient's blood or body fluids have a high risk of BBFE.[12] As per the World Health Organization estimates, 3 million HCWs are exposed to bloodborne pathogens each year, resulting in 170,000 HIV infections, 2 million HBV infections, and 900,000 HCV infections.[13]

Needlestick and sharp injuries (NSIs) are caused when health care personnel mistakenly puncture their skin with needles or sharp items, potentially exposing them to over 20 types of infectious diseases including HBV, HCV, and HIV.[8] [14] [15] According to the World Health Organization, there are approximately 2 million sharp injury exposures among 35 million HCWs each year.[16] A global systematic review and meta-analysis revealed a 43% incidence of needlestick injuries, with Africa having the highest rate at 51%, with the highest rates occurring during needle recapping and waste disposal.[15] Health care industry personnel encountered injury rates as high as 16 times than that of the overall U.S. workforce.[17] A study from Saudi Arabia revealed a 52% prevalence of WRIs, with back injuries, eye/mouth splashes, and needlestick injuries being the most common.[18]

Falls, slips, and trips are major causes of injuries among HCWs, often leading to serious consequences. These injuries can be caused by wet floors, uneven surfaces, loose rugs, poor lighting, obstacles like cords or tubing, and cluttered walkways.[19] [20] They are the second most common cause of occupational fatalities in all industries.[21] Those incidents can lead to lost workdays, reduced productivity, expensive worker compensation claims, and reduced patient care.[22] Work-related musculoskeletal injuries to muscles, bones, and joints in the health sector represent one of the main causes of injury among health professionals.[23] [24] Repetitive actions such as lifting, pushing, or tugging for patient placement and forward flexion put health care practitioners' spinal columns at risk, resulting in weights that exceed their lifting capacity even in perfect settings.[25] Those injuries are characterized by low back pain, shoulder discomfort, repetitive strain injuries, and joint pain (knees, wrists, and other joints) that restricts body movement.[26] [27]

Workplace violence is a prevalent occupational hazard with a high rate of injury and disability among workers, but its prevalence is often underreported and challenging to estimate.[28] [29] It can be categorized into four types: type I (by perpetrators who have no connection to the workplace or the victim), type II (by customers or patients), type III (current or former employees), and type IV (by perpetrators who have personal contacts with employees).[30] [31] The most common in health care settings is type II, involving patients, their families, or friends.[32] Between 2011 and 2013, the United States had an average of 24,000 workplace assaults and violent actions each year, with roughly 75% occurring in health care and social sector settings.[33]

Occupational injuries negatively impact HCWs' physical health and quality of life, leading to disability.[34] They frequently produce severe discomfort in the musculoskeletal system, making daily tasks difficult, disrupting sleep, and compromising job performance through loss of working days and reduced earnings, resulting in recurring use of health services and medicines.[35] [36] Moreover, they result in deteriorating quality of services increasing the rate of absenteeism, lack of engagement, teamwork issues, and frequent conflicts at health service delivery points.[37]

Understanding the factors contributing to injury is an important area to investigate as high injury rates translate into substantive costs for the health care industry. Although some studies were conducted in Saudi Arabia,[38] [39] [40] they mainly focused on BBFE and there was a dearth of studies that comprehensively assessed diverse occupational injuries utilizing registered data over an extended period. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the burden of WRI in a tertiary care hospital. The study's findings may provide vital details on the extent and types of injuries that health care professionals suffer, allowing for the development of tailored interventions to improve workplace safety. It also informs hospital administrators and local planners on the efficacy of safety standards and potential cost savings in health care. The study contributes to worldwide occupational health knowledge by providing insights into the subject area. Understanding injury patterns can lead to improved training and preventive measures, resulting in greater patient care and job satisfaction.

Patients and Methods

Study Setting

This study examined data collected from January 2017 to December 2020 at Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare (JHAH), a tertiary care hospital located in Dhahran, in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. The Health, Safety, and Environment Department at JHAH oversees the health, wellness, occupational safety, and environmental aspects of its employees to maintain a safe working environment and adhere to best evidence-based practices. Incident, accident, and injury reports are systematically recorded using the Datix reporting system.

Study Population

There was no active selection of study participants. The data have been provided by facility-based occupational health specialists who have been utilizing Exposure Prevention Information Network (EPINet) for several years, some since 2012. This study investigated a 4-year data aggregate of 187 health care providers who had a prior history of any occupational accident and were enrolled in the system.

Data Collection

The EPINet is a Microsoft Access-based surveillance system, developed by the International Safety Center, to standardize the recording and tracking of BBFEs in health care facilities.[41] The Ministry of Health (MOH) of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has adopted the EPINet program in 52 MOH federal hospitals by the year 2012.[42] Datix is the reporting system in which each incident, accident, and injuries sustained by HCWs are recorded. Then, each exposed individual was assessed at the staff clinic or emergency room (for after-hours exposures), where blood tests were asked for, counseling was given, and postexposure prophylactic therapy was commenced if necessary. The infection control team operates a root-cause analysis to prevent future recurrence of the event. Occupational health contacts the injured employee to discuss the injury and treatment, implementing measures to prevent seroconversion; when applicable, staff blood tests are repeated at 3 and 6 months. A clinical assessment by an occupational medicine specialist is conducted, if necessary, to evaluate job fitness and design a progressive return-to-work plan, if needed. All the details such as job category of the exposed worker, department or facility, injury location and time, type and purpose of the sharp item, contamination status, source patient details, original user of the sharp item, and the injury's place and severity were recorded using EPINet ver 1.5. Furthermore, the program can gather more details about the exposure, such as the device and technique used, and then provide detailed feedback on which areas are most vulnerable to exposure.[43]

Data Quality

The above three-decade participatory development and modification of the instrument have substantiated evidence for both content and face validity. The exposure patterns are consistent among organizations and throughout the year, reinforcing the instrument's reliability.[44]

Outcome Measurements

Occupational injuries or illnesses among JHAH workers are systematically categorized to effectively record and address various types of incidents. This approach ensures that appropriate care and preventive measures are implemented, promoting a safer and healthier work environment. The following categories were used: (1) loss time injury refers to any injury that necessitates taking time off work, (2) restricted duty injury involves injuries that require modifications to duties or working hours. (3) medical treatment case includes injuries that need medical treatment by a physician, such as medication, injections, or radiological investigations, and (4) first aid (FA) covers injuries that only require FA without medical intervention by a physician such as BBFEs and needlestick injuries, provided there is no seroconversion.

Furthermore, EPINet categorized the exposures into two categories, BBFEs and NSIs. According to the classification, needlestick injuries encompass all reported incidents where a needle or any other sharp object exposed to a patient's body fluid pierces the skin of a health care provider. Whereas BBFE includes all instances where a patient's blood or body fluid comes into contact with nonintact skin or mucous membranes (such as the eyes and mouth) of a health care provider; these are classified as mucosal exposures and human bites.[38]

Data Analysis

Data for this study were extracted from the Datix system of EPINet and exported to SPSS version 16.0 for analysis. The data set included variables such as the type of injury, cause, department, and time of occurrence. Descriptive statistics such as frequency, percent, mean, and median were used to summarize the distribution of different types of injuries. The results were presented in text, table, and figure forms.

Results

Background Characteristics of HCWs

Data from 187 HCWs were considered for this study. More than half (51.8%) of the HCWs were nurses followed by physicians (20.8%) ([Fig. 1]).

Fig. 1 Distribution of health care workers by their profession, in Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare (JHAH) from 2017 to 2020, Saudi Arabia.

The Magnitude of Occupational Injuries by HCWs

Between January 2017 and December 2020, a total of 187 workplace injuries were recorded in the JHAH. BBFEs were the primary categories of reported occupational injuries through Datix, accounting for 56.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 52.34, 59.89) of all injuries. Falls, slips, trips, and collisions constituted the second most prevalent cause of occupational injuries, representing 15% (95% CI: 12.47, 18.73) of the total injuries (19/187) and the most significant reason for lost workday injuries. Other sharp injuries account for 10.2% (95% CI: 7.89, 13.01), while injuries resulting from physical or mental strain make up 6.4% (95% CI: 4.88, 8.79). Nine health care providers were victims of workplace violence or assaults with an annual average of two reported incidents. These violent incidents were reported by the behavioral health unit and emergency unit. Musculoskeletal disorder or pain was reported by four staff members within 4 years. Only three instances of dermatitis were reported, all related to using of hand sanitizer. The highest number of each injury was recorded in the year 2019 ([Table 1]).

Table 1 Occupational injuries recorded in JHAH from 2017 to 2020, Saudi Arabia

Categories of occupational injuries	Number of injuries in each year
	2017 (%)	2018 (%)	2019 (%)	2020 (%)	Total (%)
Blood and body fluid exposure	21	25	29	31	106 (56.7)
Slips, trips, and collisions	4	6	11	7	28 (15.0)
Other sharps injury	1	7	8	3	19 (10.2)
Injury caused by physical or mental strain	3	0	4	5	12 (6.4)
Injury caused by workplace violence or assaults	2	1	5	1	9 (4.8)
Traffic accident (outside the organization performing organizational duty)	0	0	3	3	6 (3.2)
Manual handling	2	0	2	0	4 (2.1)
Dermatitis	0	0	2	1	3 (1.6)
Contact with hazardous substance	0	0	0	0	0 (0.0)
Total	33	39	64	51	187

Abbreviation: JHAH, Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare.

Blood and Body Fluids Exposures

Over the past 4 years, the cumulative incidence of BBFEs reported was 7.05 BBFE per 100 occupied beds. The highest number of health care professionals with BBFEs was documented in 2019 and 2020, at 36 and 48 events, respectively. In the specified category, needlestick injuries surpassed both mucosal and human bite injuries over all four consecutive years. The rate of needlestick injuries was 3.2 per 100 occupied hospital beds. Human bite injuries experienced the lowest incidence over the years, with no reports in 2018 ([Fig. 2]).

Fig. 2 The distribution of blood and body fluid exposures among health care workers in Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare (JHAH) from 2017 to 2020, Saudi Arabia.

Locations for BBFE

The analysis of data on BBFE indicated that the majority (38.7%) of BBFE happened at the operating theaters, followed by the emergency room (28.3%). Comparative number of incidents was recorded in the supportive lab and medical inpatient units ([Table 2]).

Table 2 Locations of BBFE service delivery points (locations) in JHAH from 2017 to 2020, Saudi Arabia (n = 106)

Locations/Departments	Human bite	Mucosa	Needlestick	Total (%)
Operating room	0	6	35	41 (38.7)
Emergency department	0	3	27	30 (28.3)
Supportive lab	0	2	6	8 (7.5)
Medical inpatient	0	1	6	7 (6.6)
Pediatric ICU	1	0	2	2 (1.9)
Pediatrics (0–5 y)	1	0	4	5 (4.7)
Orthopedic/Surgical inpatient	1	1	2	4 (3.8)
Dental	0	0	5	5 (4.7)
Surgical unit	0	0	3	3 (2.8)
Total	3	13	90	100 (100.0)

Abbreviations: BBFE, blood and body fluid exposure; ICU, intensive care unit; JHAH, Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare.

Needlestick Injuries

Overall, needlestick injuries accounted for 84.9% of BBFE and 48.1% of all occupational injuries. Furthermore, the analysis was done to show the distribution of needlestick injury by type of needle. Throughout the period, injuries caused by suture needles emerged as the predominant cause of needlestick injuries, closely followed by hypodermic needles and cannulas ([Table 3]).

Table 3 The distribution of needlestick injuries by type of needles in JHAH from 2017 to 2020, Saudi Arabia

Type of needles	2017	2018	2019	2020	Total (%)
Suture needle	2	2	9	14	27 (30.0)
Hypodermic needle (Butterfly) for intravenous infusion or venipuncture	1	1	9	10	21 (23.3)
Cannulas (various products)	4	2	5	8	19 (21.1)
Hypodermic needle attached to a disposable syringe	2	1	2	1	6 (6.7)
Insulin syringe needle	0	1	2	1	4 (4.4)
Biopsy needle	0	0	1	2	3 (3.3)
Blood gas syringe	0	1	0	1	2 (2.2)
IV catheter	0	0	0	2	2 (2.2)
Recapper and syringe holder	0	0	0	1	1 (1.1)
Port-a-cath access needle	0	0	1	1	2 (2.2)
Central venous line	0	0	0	1	1 (1.1)
Hypodermic needle on blood collection device (Vacutainer)	0	0	1	0	1 (1.1)
Spinal needle	0	0	1	0	1 (1.1)
Total	9	8	31	42	90 (100.0)

Abbreviation: JHAH, Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare.

BBFEs by Health Care Workers

Occupational injuries were further assessed by the profession of health care provider reporting the injury. Accordingly, 113/187 (60.4%) of all injuries and 57.3% of BBFEs were experienced by nurses, followed by physicians and allied health care providers ([Table 4]).

Table 4 The distribution of blood and body fluid exposures by health care workers category in JHAH from 2017 to 2020, Saudi Arabia

HCWs categories (n = 106)	Number of BBFEs per year
	2017	2018	2019	2020	Total (%)
Nurse	13	6	23	15	57 (53.8)
Physician	5	3	7	4	19 (17.9)
Allied health	2	2	4	5	13 (12.3)
Housekeeping	1	0	1	2	4 (3.8)
Student/Trainee (physician)	0	1	1	1	3 (2.8)
Student/Trainee (nurse)	1	1	2	2	6 (5.6)
Others	1	0	1	2	4 (3.8)
Total	23	13	39	31	106 (100%)

Abbreviations: BBFE, blood and body fluid exposure; HCW, health care worker; JHAH, Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare.

Reportable Injuries

Reportable injuries were grouped according to the OSHA standards, with loss time injuries being the majority of reports, followed by cases requiring medical attention. Restricted work injury accounted for the lowest report. There was no report for other categories: work-related fatality, medical treatment beyond FA, loss of consciousness, and significant injuries or illnesses ([Fig. 3]).

Fig. 3 Distribution of reported injuries in Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare (JHAH) from 2017 to 2020, Saudi Arabia.

Discussion

Occupational injuries in the health care sector provide considerable issues, affecting the welfare of health care professionals and the overall efficacy of health care facilities. This study aims to provide a thorough examination of occupational injuries documented over 4 years at a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia. Accordingly, 56.7% of occupational injuries were BBFEs, followed by falls, slips, trips, and collisions (15.0%), sharp injuries (10.2%), and strain-related injuries (6.4%). The cumulative incidence of BBFEs was 7.05 BBFE per 100 occupied beds per year. Needlestick injuries represent nearly half (48.1%) of all injuries recorded. The majority of the reported BBFEs were by nurses, followed by physicians and allied health care providers.

The cumulative number of BBFE (7.05 BBFE per 100 occupied beds) reported in this study was higher than reports from the Duke Health and Safety Surveillance System (5.5 per 100 occupied beds).[45] Another study in France reported an incidence rate of exposures of 8.9 per 100 hospital beds.[46] The overall magnitude of BBFE in this study (56.7%) was consistent with the report from the United States (58.0%),[44] higher than studies from France (39.1 and 23.8%)[46] [47] but lower than a report from Turkey (64%).[48] The incidence of needlestick injury in this study (3.2 incidents per 100 beds) was lower than the reports from Japan (4.8 per 100 occupied beds)[49] and Saudi Arabia (25.43 per 100 occupied beds).[40] A study done in Australia reported 3.23 per 100 full-time equivalent employees.[50] The diverse occurrence and proportions of workplace injuries among health care providers across different countries could be ascribed to variations in safety regulations, health care infrastructure, training and education, cultural attitudes, workload, staffing levels, economic factors, and reporting practices.

Falls, slips, trips, and collisions were the second leading cause of occupational injury, accounting for 15%, which is consistent with a study conducted in the United States, where 18% of HCWs experienced this sort of injury in the previous 12 months.[51] A study in South Africa showed that 20% of HCWs experienced fall, slip, and trip injuries.[52] This finding shows the need for developing mitigation strategies such as improving lighting, maintaining clean and dry floors, using slip-resistant flooring, clearing walkways, marking hazardous areas, providing proper footwear, conducting regular training, implementing safety protocols, and using assistive devices.[53] [54]

The highest proportion of BBFE was sustained by nurses (53.8%), which was supported by studies from India (45.7%), Saudi Arabia (59.4%),[38] [42] Serbia (68.6%),[55] Greece (65.1%),[56] and France (60%).[57] Another study found that surgeons had a higher prevalence (64.0%) than scrub nurses (36.0%).[58] This might be due to several factors. The physical demands of their profession, such as regularly moving, lifting, and repositioning patients, commonly result in musculoskeletal injuries, and long shifts and extended hours contribute to weariness, increasing the risk of accidents.[59] [60] In addition, nurses are frequently exposed to hazardous materials such as medications, infections, and cleaning chemicals, which can cause a variety of injuries and illnesses.[61] [62] The high amount of direct patient care they offer increases the likelihood of needlestick injuries, slips, stumbles, and falls.[59] [62] Furthermore, nurses are more likely to experience workplace violence, such as physical and verbal abuse from patients or visitors.[62] [63] However, the prevalence among nurses is slightly lower in this specific study as compared to other countries, and this might be due to variations in the sample size, stricter implementation of safety protocols, better access to ergonomic training, and cultural factors that emphasize compliance with workplace safety regulations.

This study has both strengths and limitations. The study utilizes an extensive data set covering 4 years, providing substantial and practical insights regarding workplace injuries in hospitals. Nonetheless, the study encounters limitations, including possible concerns over data quality and completeness, as we lack control over the initial data collection procedure, which may create biases. The study is constrained by the variables present in the secondary data, potentially excluding pertinent elements. Moreover, the historical context of the data may restrict its relevance to contemporary actions and circumstances.

Conclusion

The study reveals that BBFEs are the most prevalent occupational injuries among HCWs, with nurses being the most affected group. Needlestick injuries constitute nearly half of these incidents, highlighting a critical area for intervention. To mitigate these risks, it is essential to implement stringent safety protocols, including regular training on handling sharp instruments, use of personal protective equipment, safe patient handling protocols, and adherence to standard precautions. Enhancing workplace ergonomics and implementing environmental safety measures can help reduce occupational injuries.

Conflict of Interest

None declared.

Authors' Contributions

We confirm that this manuscript represents original work and has not been published or submitted elsewhere. M.B.: Writing e review and editing, writing original draft, methodology, investigation, funding acquisition, and conceptualization. M.Z.: Writing original draft, methodology, investigation, formal analysis, data curation, and conceptualization.

Compliance with Ethical Principles

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and relevant local regulations. Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare (Ref 0189/24) to compliance with ethical standards for research involving human participants. All data were securely stored and only accessible to the research team. The findings of this study will be used solely for academic and scientific purposes, contributing to the improvement of workplace safety and health for health care workers.

• References

• 1 Safety O, Administration H. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Department of Labor. Occupational injury and illness recording and reporting requirements. Final rule. Fed Regist 2002; 67 (126) 44037-44048
• 2 OSHA, Safety and Health Program Management Guidelines, 2015: https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/SHPM_guidelines.pdf
• 3 OSHA, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (2011). Statement from Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis on reported decline in 2011, https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/osha/osha20111018-0
• 4 WHO, World health organization, Occupational injuries; 2024, https://www.who.int/tools/occupational-hazards-in-health-sector/occupational-injuries
• 5 Rai R, El-Zaemey S, Dorji N, Rai BD, Fritschi L. Exposure to occupational hazards among health care workers in low-and middle-income countries: a scoping review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021; 18 (05) 2603
• 6 Deuffic-Burban S, Delarocque-Astagneau E, Abiteboul D, Bouvet E, Yazdanpanah Y. Blood-borne viruses in health care workers: prevention and management. J Clin Virol 2011; 52 (01) 4-10
• 7 Tavoschi L, Mason L, Petriti U, Bunge E, Veldhuijzen I, Duffell E. Hepatitis B and C among healthcare workers and patient groups at increased risk of iatrogenic transmission in the European Union/European Economic Area. J Hosp Infect 2019; 102 (04) 359-368
• 8 Mohseni AH, Taghinezhad-S S, Xu Z, Fu X. Body fluids may contribute to human-to-human transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2: evidence and practical experience. Chin Med 2020; 15 (01) 58
• 9 Westermann C, Peters C, Lisiak B, Lamberti M, Nienhaus A. The prevalence of hepatitis C among healthcare workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Occup Environ Med 2015; 72 (12) 880-888
• 10 Elseviers MM, Arias-Guillén M, Gorke A, Arens HJ. Sharps injuries amongst healthcare workers: review of incidence, transmissions and costs. J Ren Care 2014; 40 (03) 150-156
• 11 Bahadori M, Sedigh G. Occupational exposure to blood and body fluids; 2010;1(1)
• 12 Trim JC, Elliott TS. A review of sharps injuries and preventative strategies. J Hosp Infect 2003; 53 (04) 237-242
• 13 WHO, Health care worker safety, AIDE-MEMOIRE for a strategy to protect health workers from infection with bloodborne viruses; 2019, https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-BCT-03.11
• 14 Whitby RM, McLaws ML. Hollow-bore needlestick injuries in a tertiary teaching hospital: epidemiology, education and engineering. Med J Aust 2002; 177 (08) 418-422
• 15 Hosseinipalangi Z, Golmohammadi Z, Ghashghaee A. et al. Global, regional and national incidence and causes of needlestick injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. East Mediterr Health J 2022; 28 (03) 233-241
• 16 WHO, Sharps injuries: Assessing the burden of disease from sharps injuries to health-care workers at national and local levels, Environmental burden of disease series No. 11, Reference Number: ISBN: 924159232X
• 17 Kennedy EJ, Hendricks KJ, Casey M. Sharps injury rates reported among US workers: National Electronic Injury Surveillance System-Occupational Supplement 2006 to 2020. J Occup Environ Med 2023; 65 (06) 495-501
• 18 Alameer DS, Noor Elahi IR. Prevalence and determinants of work-related injuries among healthcare workers in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Cureus 2023; 15 (03) e36679
• 19 Trinh LTT, Assareh H, Wood M, Addison-Wilson C, Sathiyaseelan Y. Falls in hospital causing injury. J Healthc Qual 2020; 42 (01) 1-11
• 20 Drebit S, Shajari S, Alamgir H, Yu S, Keen D. Occupational and environmental risk factors for falls among workers in the healthcare sector. Ergonomics 2010; 53 (04) 525-536
• 21 Bureau of Labor Statistics EMPLOYER-REPORTED WORKPLACE INJURIES AND ILLNESSES – 2018, USA. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/osh_11072019.pdf
• 22 Bell JL, Collins JW, Tiesman HM. et al. Slip, trip, and fall injuries among nursing care facility workers. Workplace Health Saf 2013; 61 (04) 147-152
• 23 EUASHW, European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. Report - Priorities for occupational safety and health research in the EU-25. 2005. https://osha.europa.eu/en/publications/report-priorities-occupational-safety-and-health-research-eu-25
• 24 WHO. International Classification of Diseases for Oncology, 3rd Edition (ICD-O-3). 2019. https://www.who.int/standards/classifications/other-classifications/international-classification-of-diseases-for-oncology
• 25 Jäger M, Jordan C, Theilmeier A. et al. Lumbar-load analysis of manual patient-handling activities for biomechanical overload prevention among healthcare workers. Ann Occup Hyg 2013; 57 (04) 528-544
• 26 Albanesi B, Piredda M, Bravi M. et al. Interventions to prevent and reduce work-related musculoskeletal injuries and pain among healthcare professionals. A comprehensive systematic review of the literature. J Safety Res 2022; 82: 124-143
• 27 Davis KG, Kotowski SE. Prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders for nurses in hospitals, long-term care facilities, and home health care: a comprehensive review. Hum Factors 2015; 57 (05) 754-792
• 28 Phillips JP. Workplace violence against health care workers in the United States. N Engl J Med 2016; 374 (17) 1661-1669
• 29 Mento C, Silvestri MC, Bruno A. et al. Workplace violence against healthcare professionals: A systematic review. Aggress Violent Behav 2020; 51: 101381
• 30 Merchant J, Lundell J. Workplace violence: A report to the nation. Injury Prevention Research Center, University of Iowa; 2001. . Accessed February 28, 2025 at: http://www.public-health.uiowa.edu/iprc/resources/workplace-violence-report.pdf
• 31 Carey I, Hendricks K. Workplace violence against healthcare workers using nationally representative estimates of emergency department data, 2015-2017. Am J Ind Med 2023; 66 (04) 333-338
• 32 Mayhew C, Chappell D. Workplace violence: an overview of patterns of risk and the emotional/stress consequences on targets. Int J Law Psychiatry 2007; 30 (4-5): 327-339
• 33 OSHA. Guidelines for preventing workplace violence for healthcare and social service workers (OSHA, 3148–04R). Washington: US Department of Labor; 2015
• 34 Freiberg A, Euler U, Girbig M, Nienhaus A, Freitag S, Seidler A. Does the use of small aids during patient handling activities lead to a decreased occurrence of musculoskeletal complaints and diseases? A systematic review. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2016; 89 (04) 547-559
• 35 Van Hoof W, O'Sullivan K, O'Keeffe M, Verschueren S, O'Sullivan P, Dankaerts W. The efficacy of interventions for low back pain in nurses: a systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud 2018; 77: 222-231
• 36 Suni JH, Kolu P, Tokola K. et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of neuromuscular exercise and back care counseling in female healthcare workers with recurrent non-specific low back pain: a blinded four-arm randomized controlled trial. BMC Public Health 2018; 18 (01) 1376
• 37 Okeafor CU, Alamina FE. A qualitative study on psychosocial hazards among health care workers in a tertiary health facility in South-South Nigeria. Ann Ib Postgrad Med 2018; 16 (01) 23-29
• 38 Samargandy SA, Bukhari LM, Samargandy SA. et al. Epidemiology and clinical consequences of occupational exposure to blood and other body fluids in a university hospital in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Med J 2016; 37 (07) 783-790
• 39 Fadil RA, Abdelmutalab NA, Abdelhafeez SA. et al. Pattern and risk factors of sharp object injuries among health care workers in two tertiary hospitals, Al Taif-Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 2016-2018. Saudi J Biol Sci 2021; 28 (11) 6582-6585
• 40 Rashidov A, Katib H, Alem SK, Al Harbi F, Noor A, Luna R. The epidemiology of needlestick and sharp injuries among healthcare workers in a secondary care hospital in Saudi Arabia: a retrospective study. Cureus 2024; 16 (04) e58880
• 41 ICS, International Safety Center, EPINet Sharps Injury and Blood and Body Fluid Data Reports, 2012 https://internationalsafetycenter.org/exposure-reports/
• 42 Memish ZA, Assiri AM, Eldalatony MM, Hathout HM. Benchmarking of percutaneous injuries at the Ministry of Health hospitals of Saudi Arabia in comparison with the United States hospitals participating in Exposure Prevention Information Network (EPINet™). Int J Occup Environ Med 2015; 6 (01) 26-33
• 43 Grimmond T, Good L. Exposure Survey of Trends in Occupational Practice (EXPO-S.T.O.P.) 2015: a national survey of sharps injuries and mucocutaneous blood exposures among health care workers in US hospitals. Am J Infect Control 2017; 45 (11) 1218-1223
• 44 Persaud E, Parker GB, Mitchell AH. Blood and body fluid exposure among healthcare workers and personal protective equipment usage in the United States. Workplace Health Saf 2023; 71 (09) 429-435
• 45 Dement JM, Epling C, Ostbye T, Pompeii LA, Hunt DL. Blood and body fluid exposure risks among health care workers: results from the Duke Health and Safety Surveillance System. Am J Ind Med 2004; 46 (06) 637-648
• 46 Venier AG, Vincent A, L'heriteau F. et al. Surveillance of occupational blood and body fluid exposures among French healthcare workers in 2004. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2007; 28 (10) 1196-1201
• 47 Battail T, Fort E, Denis MA. et al. Underreporting of occupational blood and body fluid exposure in French university hospitals in 2017. Work 2022; 73 (04) 1393-1403
• 48 Azap A, Ergönül O, Memikoğlu KO. et al. Occupational exposure to blood and body fluids among health care workers in Ankara, Turkey. Am J Infect Control 2005; 33 (01) 48-52
• 49 Yoshikawa T, Wada K, Lee JJ. et al. Incidence rate of needlestick and sharps injuries in 67 Japanese hospitals: a national surveillance study. PLoS One 2013; 8 (10) e77524
• 50 Whitby M, McLaws M-L, Slater K. Needlestick injuries in a major teaching hospital: the worthwhile effect of hospital-wide replacement of conventional hollow-bore needles. Am J Infect Control 2008; 36 (03) 180-186
• 51 Merryweather AS, Thiese MS, Kapellusch JM, Garg A, Fix DJ, Hegmann KT. Occupational factors related to slips, trips and falls among home healthcare workers. Saf Sci 2018; 107: 155-160
• 52 Mogale NM, Malangu N, Huma M. Occurrence of occupational slips, trips and falls amongst health workers in Limpopo Province of South Africa. Pula: Botswana Journal of African Studies 2015; 28 (01) 72-80
• 53 WHO, Step Safely: Strategies for preventing and managing falls across the life-course, 2021: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/978924002191-4
• 54 Joseph G. Slips, Trips, and Falls: Understanding, Preventing, and Mitigating Risks. 2023
• 55 WHO, Framework and toolkit for infection prevention and control in outbreak preparedness, readiness and response at the national level, 2021 https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240032729
• 56 Patsopoulou A, Anyfantis I, Papathanasiou IV. et al. Reported injuries from sharp objects among healthcare workers in central Greece. Healthcare (Basel) 2022; 10 (07) 1249
• 57 Tarantola A, Golliot F, Astagneau P, Fleury L, Brücker G, Bouvet E. CCLIN Paris-Nord Blood and Body Fluids (BBF) Exposure Surveillance Taskforce. Occupational blood and body fluids exposures in health care workers: four-year surveillance from the Northern France network. Am J Infect Control 2003; 31 (06) 357-363
• 58 Nagao M, Iinuma Y, Igawa J. et al. Accidental exposures to blood and body fluid in the operation room and the issue of underreporting. Am J Infect Control 2009; 37 (07) 541-544
• 59 Pope AM, Snyder MA, Mood LH. Nursing health, & environment: strengthening the relationship to improve the public's health; 1995
• 60 Shi Y, Xue H, Ma Y. et al. Prevalence of occupational exposure and its influence on job satisfaction among Chinese healthcare workers: a large-sample, cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 2020; 10 (04) e031953
• 61 Strid EN, Wåhlin C, Ros A, Kvarnström S. Health care workers' experiences of workplace incidents that posed a risk of patient and worker injury: a critical incident technique analysis. BMC Health Serv Res 2021; 21 (01) 511
• 62 Abd El-Fattah Mohamed Aly N, El-Shanawany SM, Ghanem M. Nursing workplace and its relation to occupational health outcomes and physical activity. J Res Nurs 2021; 26 (07) 602-615
• 63 Gomaa AE, Tapp LC, Luckhaupt SE. et al. Occupational traumatic injuries among workers in health care facilities - United States, 2012-2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2015; 64 (15) 405-410

Publication History

Article published online:
13 March 2025