ArticleBMC primary care2026
Current status of standard precautions: a cross-sectional evaluation of healthcare workers' knowledge and practice across northern Nigeria.
Article in BMC primary care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnsafe injection practices and inconsistent adherence to standard precautions remain important drivers of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) in resource limited settings, exposing patients and health workers to bloodborne pathogens. This study assessed knowledge and practices (KP) of injection safety and standard precautions among healthcare workers.
methodsUsing structured questionnaire, a cross-sectional survey of 912 healthcare workers across tertiary, secondary, and primary healthcare facilities was performed in Katsina State, Borno State and the Federal Capital Territory - Abuja. Data on KP of injection safety and standard precautions were obtained. Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, binary and multivariable logistic regression were performed using SPSS version 27.0 at p < 0.05 to identify associations and predictors of good KP.
resultsOf the 912 respondents, 45.8% demonstrated good knowledge while only 2.3% demonstrated good practice. Needle recapping (69.5%) and needlestick injuries (62.8% within the past year) were prevalent. Females were nearly three times more likely to demonstrate good knowledge (AOR = 2.883, 95% CI = 1.837–4.523, p < 0.001). Also, 1–5 years of service (OR = 2.873, 95% CI = 1.613–5.120, p < 0.001) and 6–10 years (OR = 2.191, 95% CI = 1.224–3.921, p = 0.008) significantly predicted good knowledge. Conversely, more than 10 years of service significantly predicted lower odds of good knowledge (OR = 0.200, 95% CI = 0.112–0.330, p < 0.001).
conclusionAlthough good knowledge of injection safety and standard precautions was observed in less than half of the study participants, practices were alarmingly weak, exposing HCWs to occupational hazards. Sustained interventions are needed, including periodic refresher training, strict enforcement of no-recapping policies, safety-engineered devices, and cadre-specific programs.
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.