Occupational injury remains a major public health concern globally, contributing significantly to morbidity, mortality, and economic loss. In Ethiopia, several systematic reviews and meta-analyses have examined the burden and determinants of occupational injuries; however, their findings remain scattered, methodologically inconsistent, and spread across multiple fields. So far, no comprehensive synthesis has been undertaken to offer an integrated understanding of the extent and causes of occupational injuries within the Ethiopian context. To address this gap, this umbrella review aimed to synthesize and compare evidence from existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the prevalence, associated factors, and prevention strategies of occupational injuries among Ethiopian workers. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across six databases—PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus—to identify eligible systematic reviews and meta-analyses published between 2019 and 2025. Due to high overlap and methodological variability, results were synthesized narratively using tabular and thematic analysis. Eight eligible systematic reviews and meta-analyses encompassing 50,586 participants were included, representing multiple sectors including healthcare, construction, textile, and waste management. Pooled prevalence of occupational injury ranged from 28.8% to 46.78%, with healthcare workers reporting lower injury rates. Common injury types included falls, lacerations, fractures, needle stick injuries, and workplace violence. Commonly identified associated factors included lack of personal protective equipment, inadequate safety training, and gender. Prevention strategies emphasized personal protective equipment use, safety training, supervision, and zero-tolerance policies for workplace violence. Occupational injuries in Ethiopia are common, preventable, and unevenly distributed across sectors and regions. Strengthening prevention through consistent PPE use, safety training, and workplace regulation should be prioritized by policymakers and employers. This study did not involve a clinical trial; therefore, inclusion of a clinical trial registration number is not applicable.
Tadele et al. (Tue,) studied this question.