Occupational Health Hazards Among Veterinarians in Saudi Arabia

Sanad Al-Harbi; Ali Al-Doweriej; Mohamed Aljaser; Sara Abdulrahman; Omar S Alnuwais; Sara M Nader; Hussein Lulu; Ahmed S Abdel-Moneim; Manal S Hussein; Azza H Abd-El-Rahman; Samy Kasem

doi:10.7759/cureus.47822

Occupational Health Hazards Among Veterinarians in Saudi Arabia

Cureus. 2023 Oct 27;15(10):e47822. doi: 10.7759/cureus.47822. eCollection 2023 Oct.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ Animal Health Sector, National Center Prevention & Control of Plants Pests & Animal Diseases, Riyadh, SAU.
² Department of Zoonoses, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, EGY.
³ Animal Health Sector, Ministry of Environment, Water and Agriculture, Riyadh, SAU.
⁴ Department of Microbiology, College of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, SAU.
⁵ Department of Pharmacology, College of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, SAU.
⁶ Department of Pathology, College of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, SAU.
⁷ Department of Virology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Kafrelsheikh University, Kafr El Sheikh, EGY.

Abstract

Introduction Veterinarians and other professionals who interact with animals on a daily basis encounter an elevated risk of exposure to both known and as-yet-undiscovered microbial agents. Additionally, they are also exposed to physical, chemical, and environmental hazards. Enhancing occupational health and safety in this context carries significant global significance. Methods This study aimed to comprehensively identify and outline the various biological, physical, chemical, and environmental health threats that were encountered by veterinarians in Saudi Arabia. To achieve this, we designed a self-completed questionnaire for 529 participants. The survey encompassed potential occupational hazards such as microbial diseases, injuries resulting from animal bites and scratches, allergies, and environmental risks like sunstroke and dust storms. Results Among the 529 participating veterinarians, 45.9% (243 individuals) reported instances of zoonotic diseases within the past five years. Notably, potential viral agents included Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, avian influenza, and foot-and-mouth disease virus. Bacterial diseases were also frequently documented, with brucellosis (18.7%) and salmonellosis (7.9%) being notable pathogens. Protozoal infections were led by Leishmaniosis, constituting the most commonly detected protozoa (29 /529, 5.5%). Interestingly, 345 (65.2%) of the individuals reported that they have experienced animal bites and scratches. Needle stick injuries were also a common occupational hazard, with an incidence rate of 19.1%. Additionally, chemical exposure was prevalent, particularly to disinfectants (57.5%) and veterinary drugs (23.4%). The study participants also reported their exposure to various environmental hazards, including sunstroke, dust, sandstorms, and heavy rains. Conclusion The findings of this study draw attention to a concerning trend among veterinarians in Saudi Arabia. Their personal health and safety appear to receive inadequate attention, potentially heightening the risk of occupationally related health hazards. These outcomes highlight the need for a reevaluation of safety protocols and infection control practices within the veterinary profession. The implications of this study can potentially inform the development of policies and initiatives aimed at mitigating occupationally related health hazards among veterinarians in Saudi Arabia.

Keywords: avian influenza; brucella species; fmdv; leishmaniosis; middle east respiratory syndrome coronavirus (mers-cov); mycobacterium tuberculous; occupational diseases; q-fever; toxoplasma gondii infection; viruses.