Evidence Hub

Knowledge, Practice and Associated Factors of Health Workers Towards Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infection Prevention in Ethiopia: Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

A. S. Asgai, Desalegn Mitiku Kidie, Tadios Lidetu, T. K. Derse, Yideg Abinew, Misganaw Alelign, Eshetu Elfios, Demeke Shumu Negesse et al.

International Journal of Urological Nursing, 2026

Abstract

Catheter‐associated urinary tract infections are common hospital‐acquired infections. Health workers' knowledge and practices are crucial for the prevention of catheter‐associated urinary tract infections. However, studies conducted in Ethiopia have reported inconsistent results regarding this aspect. This meta‐analysis and systematic review aimed to determine the pooled prevalence of health workers' knowledge, practices and associated factors for catheter‐associated urinary tract infection prevention in Ethiopia. The databases searched included PubMed, Science Direct, Hinari, Cochrane, Google Scholar and repositories. The Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale was used to level the quality of the studies. STATA 17 was used to analyse the data, and meta‐regression and Galbraith plots were used to determine heterogeneity. We also did publication bias tests, sensitivity tests and subgroup analyses based on sample size, region and study period. The PROSPERO database had this systematic review registered under protocol number CR 42025639568. The pooled prevalence of good knowledge regarding catheter‐associated urinary tract infection prevention was 46.1%. Good practice levels of health workers were 50.8%. Having guidelines (OR: 2.674, CI: 1.835, 3.513), work experience of 5–10 (OR: 1.753, CI: 1.007, 2.50) and training (OR: 1.958, CI: 1.412, 2.50) were significantly associated with good knowledge of health workers towards catheter‐associated urinary tract infection prevention. Good knowledge…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free