ArticleCureus2024
Needle Stick Injury Among Healthcare Workers in a Tertiary Care Setting in Dehradun, Sub-Himalayan Region: A Four-Year Record-Based Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sharp injuries to blood-borne pathogens among healthcare workers and influencing factors in a tertiary specialist hospital (2019-2022): a retrospective study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Occupational Injuries Among Hospital Workers: A Retrospective Study in Turkey.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNeedlestick injuries (NSIs) represent a significant occupational health risk in healthcare settings. These injuries, caused by contaminated sharps such as needles, vials, and scalpel blades, can lead to percutaneous exposure to infectious materials. Despite the severity of NSIs, they often go unreported, highlighting a critical gap in occupational safety protocols.
aimsThis study aimed to investigate the occurrence of NSIs among healthcare workers (HCWs) by sex, profession, and working areas. It also sought to explore the underlying reasons for these injuries and the factors contributing to their underreporting. METHODOLOGY: Adhering to the RECORD guidelines (Reporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely Collected Data), this record-based study involved a retrospective analysis of reported NSIs. Data were collected from voluntary reports by HCWs who experienced NSIs or exposure to potentially infectious materials such as blood and body fluids. Statistical analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 16 (Released 2007; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York) and Microsoft Excel 2010 (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington).
resultsData from 142 participants indicated a higher proportion of females experiencing NSIs compared to males, with rates of 57.7% pre-COVID and 60.6% during COVID. There were notable shifts in NSI rates across professions, with increases observed among staff nurses and ward attendants/helpers. Analysis of injury circumstances revealed a decrease in sampling procedure-related injuries but an increase during intravenous procedures and biomedical waste segregation. Injuries occurring on the right-hand index finger decreased from 52.1% pre-COVID to 31% during COVID, while those on the left-hand index finger increased from 19.7% pre-COVID to 39.4% during COVID. Statistically significant associations were found between the injury site and the place of occurrence (p=0.021). Healthcare professionals commonly cleansed the site with disinfectants and used personal protective equipment (PPE) kits, with increased PPE usage noted during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings emphasize the evolving dynamics of NSIs among HCWs and underscore the importance of tailored preventive measures during pandemics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.