Needlestick Injuries Are Still Happening
But They're Preventable
Clinical Summary: Despite regulations like the Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act, needlestick injuries still occur over 385,000 times per year in the U.S.—with nurses affected the most. Many current safety devices are flawed: they are poorly designed, allow for exposure, and still pose disposal risks. Underreporting only worsens the issue. VanishPoint syringes offer a game-changing solution with automated, single-handed retraction, passive activation, and a dramatically lower injury rate—just 1 in 100 million.
The Scope of the Problem
The statistics are alarming: approximately 385,000 needlestick injuries¹ (NSI) occur annually in the United States alone—that’s about 1,050 injuries every day. Despite advances in medical technology and safety protocols, healthcare professionals continue to face major health risks from these preventable injuries.
Nurses are particularly vulnerable, accounting for over 52% of reported needlestick injuries, followed by cleaning staff (22.3%), physicians (18.5%), and technicians (6.9%). These injuries most frequently occur in high-pressure environments such as operating rooms (21.9%), inpatient care settings (17.6%), and emergency rooms (16.7%).²
The Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act: Progress and Limitations
In November 2000, the Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act was signed into law, requiring OSHA to revise its Bloodborne Pathogens Standard. This landmark legislation mandated:
The use of safer engineered devices and needleless systems
Annual review of exposure control plans and consideration of new safety technologies
Input from frontline healthcare workers on device selection
Maintenance of a sharps injury log³
Despite some early successes, the problem persists. While it was genuinely believed that sharps injuries would be virtually eliminated within five years of the bill’s passage, current data shows injuries trending only slightly lower than in 2001, with approximately 2.4 injuries occurring per 100 full-time equivalent staff. ⁴
Why Needlestick Injuries Continue to Occur
Many safety-engineered needles require extra steps that often brings hand close to the needle⁵ and/or results in exposure to the contaminated sharp
Some "safety" devices are difficult to use, or poorly designed, leading to improper use or non-use and continued risk of injury⁵
Safety devices with shields or sheaths may not keep contaminated sharps securely enclosed throughout disposal and can lead to downstream injuries, putting cleaning staff and other non-primary users at risk
Nearly half of all needlestick injuries go unreported⁶, limiting opportunities for prevention and improvement in safety practices
Meet VanishPoint
The Safer, Smarter Solution
The VanishPoint safety syringe features automated retraction technology that revolutionizes needlestick prevention. Unlike other safety devices that require additional manual steps, VanishPoint delivers the following unique benefits:
- Singled-handed, passive activation
- Greatly reduces exposure
- Hands remain behind the sharp
- Integrated safety mechanism
- Remains safe through disposal
- Quick and Easy to use
- Safety and effective for healthcare workers and patients
REAL SAFETY
Unmatched Safety Performance⁷
Data consistently shows that passive safety devices provide the highest level of protection against needlestick injuries. While outdated safety devices continue to be associated with significant injury rates, our VanishPoint technology has demonstrated an extraordinary safety record.
≈1 in 10,000
VanishPoint Syringe Needlestick Rate
≈1 in 100,000,000
Real Safety for Healthcare Starts Here
The evidence is clear: despite regulatory efforts, needlestick injuries remain a serious threat to healthcare workers. But you don’t have to accept this risk as an inevitable part of healthcare delivery.
Experience the clinical advantages of our advanced safety technology. Contact us today to request product samples and discover how Retractable Technologies can protect you and your colleagues during everyday clinical use.
Additionally, we’ve prepared a customizable email you can send directly to your facility’s administration to make it easier for you to advocate for safer devices. Use it to highlight your concerns and recommend truly effective safety products like VanishPoint syringes as a safer, smarter solution.
References
- Sharps Safety Program resources. (2024, April 3). Infection Control. https://www.cdc.gov/infection-control/hcp/sharps-safety/index.html
- Mohamud, R. Y. H., Mohamed, N. A., Doğan, A., Hilowle, F. M., Isse, S. A., Hassan, M. Y., & Hilowle, I. A. (2023). Needlestick and Sharps Injuries Among Healthcare Workers at a Tertiary Care Hospital: A Retrospective Single-Center Study. Risk management and healthcare policy, 16, 2281–2289. https://doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S434315
- Preventing needlesticks and sharps injuries: Reflecting on the 20th anniversary of the Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act | Blogs | CDC. (2024, November 25). https://blogs.cdc.gov/niosh-science-blog/2020/12/11/sharps-injuries/
- usefulgroup. (2025, April 11). The cost of a needlestick injury. Daniels Health. https://www.danielshealth.com/knowledge-center/cost-needlestick-injury
- Chambers, A., Mustard, C. A., Holness, D. L., Nichol, K., & Breslin, F. C. (2015). Barriers to the Adoption of Safety-Engineered Needles Following a Regulatory Standard: Lessons Learned from Three Acute Care Hospitals. Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante, 11(1), 90–101.
- Yun, J., Umemoto, K., Wang, W., & Vyas, D. (2023). National Survey of Sharps Injuries Incidence Amongst Healthcare Workers in the United States. International journal of general medicine, 16, 1193–1204. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJGM.S404418
- Data on file.
- Bouya, S., Balouchi, A., Rafiemanesh, H., Amirshahi, M., Dastres, M., Moghadam, M. P., Behnamfar, N., Shyeback, M., Badakhsh, M., Allahyari, J., Al Mawali, A., Ebadi, A., Dezhkam, A., & Daley, K. A. (2020). Global Prevalence and Device Related Causes of Needle Stick Injuries among Health Care Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Annals of global health, 86(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.2698