MEDICAL INSTRUMENT PROCESSING PRACTICE AND ASSOCIATED FACTORS AMONG MATERNITY CARE PROVIDERS IN PUBLIC HEALTH FACILITIES OF HAWASSA CITY ADMINISTRATION, SIDAMA, ETHIOPIA, 2023

Abstract

Introduction: Globally, every year, millions of people are affected by avoidable health-care associated infections. Deficiencies in medical instrument processing contribute to a significant portion of these infections. Rusting of equipment due to procrastination and prolonged use of the same solution in cleaning them after use were some of the problems that have been recognized on the ground at different healthcare facilities. Despite these shortfalls, only a few prior studies practically assessed the actual medical instrument processing practices of health care workers in Ethiopia. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess medical instrument processing practices and associated factors among maternity care providers in public health facilities of Hawassa city administration, Sidama, Ethiopia, 2023. Method: An institutional-based cross-sectional study was done among maternity care providers in public health facilities in Hawassa city, from 1st July to 30th August/2023. All (402) maternity care providers in all public health facilities under the study area were enrolled in this study. Both an interview administered structured questionnaire and an observational checklist were used for data collection. After collection in the Kobo toolbox, the data was exported to Excel and then imported to version 25 of SPSS for analysis. Binary logistic regression was done to identify the association between each independent variable and the outcome variable. Result: A total of 398 maternity care providers participated in the study, with a response rate of 99%. Among the total respondents, 48.7% of the participants had performed safe practices in medical instrument processing. The odds of safe medical instrument processing practices were 3.678, 3.035, and 3.318 times higher among health care workers who were being trained on medical instrument processing, had access to guidelines on medical instrument processing, and were knowledgeable about medical instrument processing compared to their counterparts (AOR =3.678, 95% CI (1.971–9.67), (AOR =3.035, 95% CI (1.44–6.574), and (AOR =3.49, 95% CI: 2.067–5.895), respectively.