Summary of findings 4. (CBA) Safe intravenous systems compared to regular systems for preventing percutaneous exposure injuries caused by needles in healthcare personnel.

Safe intravenous systems compared to regular systems CBA for preventing percutaneous exposure injuries caused by needles in healthcare personnel
Patient or population: preventing percutaneous exposure injuries caused by needles in healthcare personnel Setting: hospital Intervention: Safe intravenous systems Comparison: regular systems CBA
Outcomes	Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)		Relative effect (95% CI)	№ of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Risk with regular systems CBA	Risk with Safe intravenous systems
Number of needlestick injuries	Study population		Rate ratio 0.06 (0.00 to 1.09)	(1 observational study)	⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW 1 2
	36.36 per 1 000	2.18 per 1 000 (0.00 to 39.63)
*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio; OR: Odds ratio;
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

¹ We downgraded the quality of evidence by two levels due to risk of bias (no random sequence generation or allocation concealment).
 ² We downgraded the quality of evidence by one level due to imprecision (wide confidence interval).