1
|
Loibner M, Barach P, Wolfgruber S, Langner C, Stangl V, Rieger J, Föderl-Höbenreich E, Hardt M, Kicker E, Groiss S, Zacharias M, Wurm P, Gorkiewicz G, Regitnig P, Zatloukal K. Resilience and Protection of Health Care and Research Laboratory Workers During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: Analysis and Case Study From an Austrian High Security Laboratory. Front Psychol 2022; 13:901244. [PMID: 35936273 PMCID: PMC9353000 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.901244] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2022] [Accepted: 06/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has highlighted the interdependency of healthcare systems and research organizations on manufacturers and suppliers of personnel protective equipment (PPE) and the need for well-trained personnel who can react quickly to changing working conditions. Reports on challenges faced by research laboratory workers (RLWs) are rare in contrast to the lived experience of hospital health care workers. We report on experiences gained by RLWs (e.g., molecular scientists, pathologists, autopsy assistants) who significantly contributed to combating the pandemic under particularly challenging conditions due to increased workload, sickness and interrupted PPE supply chains. RLWs perform a broad spectrum of work with SARS-CoV-2 such as autopsies, establishment of virus cultures and infection models, development and verification of diagnostics, performance of virus inactivation assays to investigate various antiviral agents including vaccines and evaluation of decontamination technologies in high containment biological laboratories (HCBL). Performance of autopsies and laboratory work increased substantially during the pandemic and thus led to highly demanding working conditions with working shifts of more than eight hours working in PPE that stressed individual limits and also the ergonomic and safety limits of PPE. We provide detailed insights into the challenges of the stressful daily laboratory routine since the pandemic began, lessons learned, and suggest solutions for better safety based on a case study of a newly established HCBL (i.e., BSL-3 laboratory) designed for autopsies and research laboratory work. Reduced personal risk, increased resilience, and stress resistance can be achieved by improved PPE components, better training, redundant safety measures, inculcating a culture of safety, and excellent teamwork.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martina Loibner
- Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Paul Barach
- Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
- College of Population Health, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, United States
- School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Stella Wolfgruber
- Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Christine Langner
- Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Verena Stangl
- Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Julia Rieger
- Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | | | - Melina Hardt
- Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Eva Kicker
- Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Silvia Groiss
- Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Martin Zacharias
- Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Philipp Wurm
- Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Gregor Gorkiewicz
- Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Peter Regitnig
- Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Kurt Zatloukal
- Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bernardes GCS, Godoi APN, de Almeida NA, Nogueira LS, Pinheiro MB. Doffing personal protective equipment in times of COVID-19. Rev Bras Med Trab 2021; 19:88-93. [PMID: 33986785 PMCID: PMC8100761 DOI: 10.47626/1679-4435-2021-605] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
COVID-19, a disease caused by a coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), has worried health authorities in Brazil and worldwide because of its high infectivity and rapid spread. Within this context, health care workers are at greater risk of infection for being in close contact with patients, which is inherent to their work activities. To reduce the risk, protective measures must be adopted and personal protective equipment is essential. However, the process of removing personal protective equipment, named doffing, is as important as its correct use and can be a source of contamination for workers, especially when equipment is lacking in the market and lifespan is increased. Therefore, this review aimed to discuss the process of doffing personal protective equipment and its correct sequence based on data available in the literature.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Ana Paula Nogueira Godoi
- Universidade Federal de São João del-Rei, Campus Centro-Oeste Dona Lindu, Divinópolis, MG, Brazil
| | | | | | - Melina Barros Pinheiro
- Universidade Federal de São João del-Rei, Campus Centro-Oeste Dona Lindu, Divinópolis, MG, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Lee N, Lee HJ. South Korean Nurses' Experiences with Patient Care at a COVID-19-Designated Hospital: Growth after the Frontline Battle against an Infectious Disease Pandemic. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2020; 17:E9015. [PMID: 33287343 PMCID: PMC7729510 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17239015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 78] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2020] [Revised: 11/24/2020] [Accepted: 12/01/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
COVID-19 is a respiratory disease caused by a novel coronavirus that quickly spread worldwide, resulting in a global pandemic. Healthcare professionals coming into close contact with COVID-19 patients experience mental health issues, including stress, depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, and burnout. This study aimed to explore the experiences of COVID-19-designated hospital nurses in South Korea who provided care for patients based on their lived experiences. Eighteen nurses working in a COVID-19-designated hospital completed in-depth individual telephone interviews between July and September 2020, and the data were analyzed using Giorgi's phenomenological methodology. The essential structure of the phenomenon was growth after the frontline battle against an infectious disease pandemic. Nine themes were identified: Pushed onto the Battlefield Without Any Preparation, Struggling on the Frontline, Altered Daily Life, Low Morale, Unexpectedly Long War, Ambivalence Toward Patients, Forces that Keep Me Going, Giving Meaning to My Work, and Taking Another Step in One's Growth. The nurses who cared for patients with COVID-19 had both negative and positive experiences, including post-traumatic growth. These findings could be used as basic data for establishing hospital systems and policies to support frontline nurses coping with infectious disease control to increase their adaption and positive experiences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Hyun-Ju Lee
- College of Nursing, Catholic University of Pusan, Busan 46252, Korea;
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Wundavalli L, Singh S, Singh AR, Satpathy S. How to rapidly design and operationalise PPE donning and doffing areas for a COVID-19 care facility: quality improvement initiative. BMJ Open Qual 2020; 9:bmjoq-2020-001022. [PMID: 32978176 PMCID: PMC7520810 DOI: 10.1136/bmjoq-2020-001022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2020] [Revised: 07/27/2020] [Accepted: 09/03/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Effective implementation of standard precautions specific to COVID-19 is a challenge for hospitals within the existing constraints of time and resources. Aim To rapidly design and operationalise personal protective equipment (PPE) donning and doffing areas required for a COVID-19 care facility. Methods Literature review was done to identify all issues pertaining to donning and doffing in terms of Donabedian’s structure, process and outcome. Training on donning and doffing was given to hospital staff. Donning and doffing mock drills were held. 5S was used as a tool to set up donning and doffing areas. Instances of donning and doffing were observed for protocol deviations and errors. Plan–do–study–act cycles were conducted every alternate day for 4 weeks. The initiative was reported using Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE) guidelines. Results Best practices in donning and doffing were described. Our study recommends a minimum area of 16 m2 each for donning and doffing rooms. Verbally assisted doffing was found most useful than visual prompts. Discussion Challenges included sustaining the structure and process of donning and doffing, varied supplies of PPE which altered sequencing of donning and/or doffing, and training non-healthcare workers such as plumbers, electricians and drivers who were required during emergencies in the facility. Conclusion Our study used evidence-based literature and quality improvement (QI) tools to design and operationalise donning and doffing areas with focus on people, task and environment. Our QI will enable healthcare facilities to rapidly prototype donning and doffing areas in a systematic way.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- LaxmiTej Wundavalli
- Hospital Administration, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
| | - Sheetal Singh
- Hospital Administration, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
| | - Angel Rajan Singh
- Hospital Administration, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
| | - Sidhartha Satpathy
- Hospital Administration, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Verbeek JH, Rajamaki B, Ijaz S, Sauni R, Toomey E, Blackwood B, Tikka C, Ruotsalainen JH, Kilinc Balci FS. Personal protective equipment for preventing highly infectious diseases due to exposure to contaminated body fluids in healthcare staff. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020; 5:CD011621. [PMID: 32412096 PMCID: PMC8785899 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011621.pub5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In epidemics of highly infectious diseases, such as Ebola, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), or coronavirus (COVID-19), healthcare workers (HCW) are at much greater risk of infection than the general population, due to their contact with patients' contaminated body fluids. Personal protective equipment (PPE) can reduce the risk by covering exposed body parts. It is unclear which type of PPE protects best, what is the best way to put PPE on (i.e. donning) or to remove PPE (i.e. doffing), and how to train HCWs to use PPE as instructed. OBJECTIVES To evaluate which type of full-body PPE and which method of donning or doffing PPE have the least risk of contamination or infection for HCW, and which training methods increase compliance with PPE protocols. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL to 20 March 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA We included all controlled studies that evaluated the effect of full-body PPE used by HCW exposed to highly infectious diseases, on the risk of infection, contamination, or noncompliance with protocols. We also included studies that compared the effect of various ways of donning or doffing PPE, and the effects of training on the same outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in included trials. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses were appropriate. MAIN RESULTS Earlier versions of this review were published in 2016 and 2019. In this update, we included 24 studies with 2278 participants, of which 14 were randomised controlled trials (RCT), one was a quasi-RCT and nine had a non-randomised design. Eight studies compared types of PPE. Six studies evaluated adapted PPE. Eight studies compared donning and doffing processes and three studies evaluated types of training. Eighteen studies used simulated exposure with fluorescent markers or harmless microbes. In simulation studies, median contamination rates were 25% for the intervention and 67% for the control groups. Evidence for all outcomes is of very low certainty unless otherwise stated because it is based on one or two studies, the indirectness of the evidence in simulation studies and because of risk of bias. Types of PPE The use of a powered, air-purifying respirator with coverall may protect against the risk of contamination better than a N95 mask and gown (risk ratio (RR) 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.43) but was more difficult to don (non-compliance: RR 7.5, 95% CI 1.81 to 31.1). In one RCT (59 participants) coveralls were more difficult to doff than isolation gowns (very low-certainty evidence). Gowns may protect better against contamination than aprons (small patches: mean difference (MD) -10.28, 95% CI -14.77 to -5.79). PPE made of more breathable material may lead to a similar number of spots on the trunk (MD 1.60, 95% CI -0.15 to 3.35) compared to more water-repellent material but may have greater user satisfaction (MD -0.46, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.08, scale of 1 to 5). According to three studies that tested more recently introduced full-body PPE ensembles, there may be no difference in contamination. Modified PPE versus standard PPE The following modifications to PPE design may lead to less contamination compared to standard PPE: sealed gown and glove combination (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.78), a better fitting gown around the neck, wrists and hands (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.55), a better cover of the gown-wrist interface (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.78, low-certainty evidence), added tabs to grab to facilitate doffing of masks (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.80) or gloves (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.31). Donning and doffing Using Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations for doffing may lead to less contamination compared to no guidance (small patches: MD -5.44, 95% CI -7.43 to -3.45). One-step removal of gloves and gown may lead to less bacterial contamination (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.77) but not to less fluorescent contamination (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.28) than separate removal. Double-gloving may lead to less viral or bacterial contamination compared to single gloving (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.66) but not to less fluorescent contamination (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.28). Additional spoken instruction may lead to fewer errors in doffing (MD -0.9, 95% CI -1.4 to -0.4) and to fewer contamination spots (MD -5, 95% CI -8.08 to -1.92). Extra sanitation of gloves before doffing with quaternary ammonium or bleach may decrease contamination, but not alcohol-based hand rub. Training The use of additional computer simulation may lead to fewer errors in doffing (MD -1.2, 95% CI -1.6 to -0.7). A video lecture on donning PPE may lead to better skills scores (MD 30.70, 95% CI 20.14 to 41.26) than a traditional lecture. Face-to-face instruction may reduce noncompliance with doffing guidance more (odds ratio 0.45, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.98) than providing folders or videos only. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We found low- to very low-certainty evidence that covering more parts of the body leads to better protection but usually comes at the cost of more difficult donning or doffing and less user comfort. More breathable types of PPE may lead to similar contamination but may have greater user satisfaction. Modifications to PPE design, such as tabs to grab, may decrease the risk of contamination. For donning and doffing procedures, following CDC doffing guidance, a one-step glove and gown removal, double-gloving, spoken instructions during doffing, and using glove disinfection may reduce contamination and increase compliance. Face-to-face training in PPE use may reduce errors more than folder-based training. We still need RCTs of training with long-term follow-up. We need simulation studies with more participants to find out which combinations of PPE and which doffing procedure protects best. Consensus on simulation of exposure and assessment of outcome is urgently needed. We also need more real-life evidence. Therefore, the use of PPE of HCW exposed to highly infectious diseases should be registered and the HCW should be prospectively followed for their risk of infection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jos H Verbeek
- Cochrane Work Review Group, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Blair Rajamaki
- School of Pharmacy, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland
| | - Sharea Ijaz
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | | | - Bronagh Blackwood
- Centre for Experimental Medicine, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Christina Tikka
- Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, TYÖTERVEYSLAITOS, Finland
| | | | - F Selcen Kilinc Balci
- National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory (NPPTL), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Verbeek JH, Rajamaki B, Ijaz S, Sauni R, Toomey E, Blackwood B, Tikka C, Ruotsalainen JH, Kilinc Balci FS. Personal protective equipment for preventing highly infectious diseases due to exposure to contaminated body fluids in healthcare staff. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020; 4:CD011621. [PMID: 32293717 PMCID: PMC7158881 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011621.pub4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 161] [Impact Index Per Article: 40.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In epidemics of highly infectious diseases, such as Ebola, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), or coronavirus (COVID-19), healthcare workers (HCW) are at much greater risk of infection than the general population, due to their contact with patients' contaminated body fluids. Personal protective equipment (PPE) can reduce the risk by covering exposed body parts. It is unclear which type of PPE protects best, what is the best way to put PPE on (i.e. donning) or to remove PPE (i.e. doffing), and how to train HCWs to use PPE as instructed. OBJECTIVES To evaluate which type of full-body PPE and which method of donning or doffing PPE have the least risk of contamination or infection for HCW, and which training methods increase compliance with PPE protocols. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL to 20 March 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA We included all controlled studies that evaluated the effect of full-body PPE used by HCW exposed to highly infectious diseases, on the risk of infection, contamination, or noncompliance with protocols. We also included studies that compared the effect of various ways of donning or doffing PPE, and the effects of training on the same outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in included trials. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses were appropriate. MAIN RESULTS Earlier versions of this review were published in 2016 and 2019. In this update, we included 24 studies with 2278 participants, of which 14 were randomised controlled trials (RCT), one was a quasi-RCT and nine had a non-randomised design. Eight studies compared types of PPE. Six studies evaluated adapted PPE. Eight studies compared donning and doffing processes and three studies evaluated types of training. Eighteen studies used simulated exposure with fluorescent markers or harmless microbes. In simulation studies, median contamination rates were 25% for the intervention and 67% for the control groups. Evidence for all outcomes is of very low certainty unless otherwise stated because it is based on one or two studies, the indirectness of the evidence in simulation studies and because of risk of bias. Types of PPE The use of a powered, air-purifying respirator with coverall may protect against the risk of contamination better than a N95 mask and gown (risk ratio (RR) 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.43) but was more difficult to don (non-compliance: RR 7.5, 95% CI 1.81 to 31.1). In one RCT (59 participants), people with a long gown had less contamination than those with a coverall, and coveralls were more difficult to doff (low-certainty evidence). Gowns may protect better against contamination than aprons (small patches: mean difference (MD) -10.28, 95% CI -14.77 to -5.79). PPE made of more breathable material may lead to a similar number of spots on the trunk (MD 1.60, 95% CI -0.15 to 3.35) compared to more water-repellent material but may have greater user satisfaction (MD -0.46, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.08, scale of 1 to 5). Modified PPE versus standard PPE The following modifications to PPE design may lead to less contamination compared to standard PPE: sealed gown and glove combination (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.78), a better fitting gown around the neck, wrists and hands (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.55), a better cover of the gown-wrist interface (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.78, low-certainty evidence), added tabs to grab to facilitate doffing of masks (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.80) or gloves (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.31). Donning and doffing Using Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations for doffing may lead to less contamination compared to no guidance (small patches: MD -5.44, 95% CI -7.43 to -3.45). One-step removal of gloves and gown may lead to less bacterial contamination (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.77) but not to less fluorescent contamination (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.28) than separate removal. Double-gloving may lead to less viral or bacterial contamination compared to single gloving (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.66) but not to less fluorescent contamination (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.28). Additional spoken instruction may lead to fewer errors in doffing (MD -0.9, 95% CI -1.4 to -0.4) and to fewer contamination spots (MD -5, 95% CI -8.08 to -1.92). Extra sanitation of gloves before doffing with quaternary ammonium or bleach may decrease contamination, but not alcohol-based hand rub. Training The use of additional computer simulation may lead to fewer errors in doffing (MD -1.2, 95% CI -1.6 to -0.7). A video lecture on donning PPE may lead to better skills scores (MD 30.70, 95% CI 20.14 to 41.26) than a traditional lecture. Face-to-face instruction may reduce noncompliance with doffing guidance more (odds ratio 0.45, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.98) than providing folders or videos only. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We found low- to very low-certainty evidence that covering more parts of the body leads to better protection but usually comes at the cost of more difficult donning or doffing and less user comfort, and may therefore even lead to more contamination. More breathable types of PPE may lead to similar contamination but may have greater user satisfaction. Modifications to PPE design, such as tabs to grab, may decrease the risk of contamination. For donning and doffing procedures, following CDC doffing guidance, a one-step glove and gown removal, double-gloving, spoken instructions during doffing, and using glove disinfection may reduce contamination and increase compliance. Face-to-face training in PPE use may reduce errors more than folder-based training. We still need RCTs of training with long-term follow-up. We need simulation studies with more participants to find out which combinations of PPE and which doffing procedure protects best. Consensus on simulation of exposure and assessment of outcome is urgently needed. We also need more real-life evidence. Therefore, the use of PPE of HCW exposed to highly infectious diseases should be registered and the HCW should be prospectively followed for their risk of infection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jos H Verbeek
- Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Cochrane Work Review Group, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1105AZ
| | - Blair Rajamaki
- University of Eastern Finland, School of Pharmacy, Kuopio, Finland
| | - Sharea Ijaz
- University of Bristol, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK, BS1 2NT
| | | | | | - Bronagh Blackwood
- Queen's University Belfast, Centre for Experimental Medicine, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Wellcome-Wolfson Building, 97 Lisburn Road, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK, BT9 7LB
| | - Christina Tikka
- Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, TYÖTERVEYSLAITOS, Finland, FI-70032
| | - Jani H Ruotsalainen
- Finnish Medicines Agency, Assessment of Pharmacotherapies, Microkatu 1, Kuopio, Finland, FI-70210
| | - F Selcen Kilinc Balci
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory (NPPTL), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 626 Cochrans Mill Road, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 15236
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Chughtai AA, Khan W. Use of personal protective equipment to protect against respiratory infections in Pakistan: A systematic review. J Infect Public Health 2020; 13:385-390. [PMID: 32146139 PMCID: PMC7102706 DOI: 10.1016/j.jiph.2020.02.032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2018] [Revised: 10/07/2018] [Accepted: 01/21/2019] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Like other low-income countries, limited data are available on the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in Pakistan. We conducted a systematic review of studies on PPE use for respiratory infections in healthcare settings in Pakistan. MEDLINE, Embase and Goggle Scholar were searched for clinical, epidemiological and laboratory-based studies in English, and 13 studies were included; all were observational/cross-sectional studies. The studies examined PPE use in hospital (n=7), dental (n=4) or laboratory (n=2) settings. Policies and practices on PPE use were inconsistent. Face masks and gloves were the most commonly used PPE to protect from respiratory and other infections. PPE was not available in many facilities and its use was limited to high-risk situations. Compliance with PPE use was low among healthcare workers, and reuse of PPE was reported. Clear policies on the use of PPE and available PPE are needed to avoid inappropriate practices that could result in the spread of infection. Large, multimethod studies are recommended on PPE use to inform national infection-control guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abrar Ahmad Chughtai
- School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
| | - Wasiq Khan
- University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Verbeek JH, Rajamaki B, Ijaz S, Tikka C, Ruotsalainen JH, Edmond MB, Sauni R, Kilinc Balci FS. Personal protective equipment for preventing highly infectious diseases due to exposure to contaminated body fluids in healthcare staff. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 7:CD011621. [PMID: 31259389 PMCID: PMC6601138 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011621.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 50] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In epidemics of highly infectious diseases, such as Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) or Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), healthcare workers (HCW) are at much greater risk of infection than the general population, due to their contact with patients' contaminated body fluids. Contact precautions by means of personal protective equipment (PPE) can reduce the risk. It is unclear which type of PPE protects best, what is the best way to remove PPE, and how to make sure HCW use PPE as instructed. OBJECTIVES To evaluate which type of full body PPE and which method of donning or doffing PPE have the least risk of self-contamination or infection for HCW, and which training methods increase compliance with PPE protocols. SEARCH METHODS We searched MEDLINE (PubMed up to 15 July 2018), Cochrane Central Register of Trials (CENTRAL up to 18 June 2019), Scopus (Scopus 18 June 2019), CINAHL (EBSCOhost 31 July 2018), and OSH-Update (up to 31 December 2018). We also screened reference lists of included trials and relevant reviews, and contacted NGOs and manufacturers of PPE. SELECTION CRITERIA We included all controlled studies that compared the effects of PPE used by HCW exposed to highly infectious diseases with serious consequences, such as Ebola or SARS, on the risk of infection, contamination, or noncompliance with protocols. This included studies that used simulated contamination with fluorescent markers or a non-pathogenic virus.We also included studies that compared the effect of various ways of donning or doffing PPE, and the effects of training in PPE use on the same outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias in included trials. We planned to perform meta-analyses but did not find sufficiently similar studies to combine their results. MAIN RESULTS We included 17 studies with 1950 participants evaluating 21 interventions. Ten studies are Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs), one is a quasi RCT and six have a non-randomised controlled design. Two studies are awaiting assessment.Ten studies compared types of PPE but only six of these reported sufficient data. Six studies compared different types of donning and doffing and three studies evaluated different types of training. Fifteen studies used simulated exposure with fluorescent markers or harmless viruses. In simulation studies, contamination rates varied from 10% to 100% of participants for all types of PPE. In one study HCW were exposed to Ebola and in another to SARS.Evidence for all outcomes is based on single studies and is very low quality.Different types of PPEPPE made of more breathable material may not lead to more contamination spots on the trunk (Mean Difference (MD) 1.60 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) -0.15 to 3.35) than more water repellent material but may have greater user satisfaction (MD -0.46; 95% CI -0.84 to -0.08, scale of 1 to 5).Gowns may protect better against contamination than aprons (MD large patches -1.36 95% CI -1.78 to -0.94).The use of a powered air-purifying respirator may protect better than a simple ensemble of PPE without such respirator (Relative Risk (RR) 0.27; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.43).Five different PPE ensembles (such as gown vs. coverall, boots with or without covers, hood vs. cap, length and number of gloves) were evaluated in one study, but there were no event data available for compared groups.Alterations to PPE design may lead to less contamination such as added tabs to grab masks (RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.80) or gloves (RR 0.22 95% CI 0.15 to 0.31), a sealed gown and glove combination (RR 0.27; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.78), or a better fitting gown around the neck, wrists and hands (RR 0.08; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.55) compared to standard PPE.Different methods of donning and doffing proceduresDouble gloving may lead to less contamination compared to single gloving (RR 0.36; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.78).Following CDC recommendations for doffing may lead to less contamination compared to no guidance (MD small patches -5.44; 95% CI -7.43 to -3.45).Alcohol-based hand rub used during the doffing process may not lead to less contamination than the use of a hypochlorite based solution (MD 4.00; 95% CI 0.47 to 34.24).Additional spoken instruction may lead to fewer errors in doffing (MD -0.9, 95% CI -1.4 to -0.4).Different types of trainingThe use of additional computer simulation may lead to fewer errors in doffing (MD -1.2, 95% CI -1.6 to -0.7).A video lecture on donning PPE may lead to better skills scores (MD 30.70; 95% CI 20.14,41.26) than a traditional lecture.Face to face instruction may reduce noncompliance with doffing guidance more (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.98) than providing folders or videos only.There were no studies on effects of training in the long term or on resource use.The quality of the evidence is very low for all comparisons because of high risk of bias in all studies, indirectness of evidence, and small numbers of participants. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We found very low quality evidence that more breathable types of PPE may not lead to more contamination, but may have greater user satisfaction. Alterations to PPE, such as tabs to grab may decrease contamination. Double gloving, following CDC doffing guidance, and spoken instructions during doffing may reduce contamination and increase compliance. Face-to-face training in PPE use may reduce errors more than video or folder based training. Because data come from single small studies with high risk of bias, we are uncertain about the estimates of effects.We still need randomised controlled trials to find out which training works best in the long term. We need better simulation studies conducted with several dozen participants to find out which PPE protects best, and what is the safest way to remove PPE. Consensus on the best way to conduct simulation of exposure and assessment of outcome is urgently needed. HCW exposed to highly infectious diseases should have their use of PPE registered and should be prospectively followed for their risk of infection in the field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jos H Verbeek
- University of Eastern FinlandCochrane Work Review GroupKuopioFinland70201
| | - Blair Rajamaki
- University of Eastern FinlandInstitute of Public Health and Clinical Nutrition, Occupational Health UnitKuopioFinland
| | - Sharea Ijaz
- University of BristolPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical SchoolBristolUKBS1 2NT
| | - Christina Tikka
- Finnish Institute of Occupational HealthCochrane Work Review GroupTYÖTERVEYSLAITOSFinlandFI‐70032
| | - Jani H Ruotsalainen
- Coronel Institute of Occupational HealthCochrane Work Review GroupAcademic Medical Center, University of AmsterdamPO Box 22700AmsterdamNetherlands1100 DE
| | - Michael B Edmond
- University of Iowa Hospitals and ClinicsC512 GH, 200 Hawkins DriveIowa CityIAUSA52241
| | - Riitta Sauni
- Finnish Institute of Occupational HealthP.O.Box 486TampereFinlandFI‐33101
| | - F Selcen Kilinc Balci
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory (NPPTL), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)626 Cochrans Mill RoadPittsburghPAUSA15236
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Chughtai AA, Stelzer-Braid S, Rawlinson W, Pontivivo G, Wang Q, Pan Y, Zhang D, Zhang Y, Li L, MacIntyre CR. Contamination by respiratory viruses on outer surface of medical masks used by hospital healthcare workers. BMC Infect Dis 2019; 19:491. [PMID: 31159777 PMCID: PMC6547584 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-019-4109-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 92] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/28/2019] [Accepted: 05/20/2019] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Medical masks are commonly used in health care settings to protect healthcare workers (HCWs) from respiratory and other infections. Airborne respiratory pathogens may settle on the surface of used masks layers, resulting in contamination. The main aim of this study was to study the presence of viruses on the surface of medical masks. METHODS Two pilot studies in laboratory and clinical settings were carried out to determine the areas of masks likely to contain maximum viral particles. A laboratory study using a mannequin and fluorescent spray showed maximum particles concentrated on upper right, middle and left sections of the medical masks. These findings were confirmed through a small clinical study. The main study was then conducted in high-risk wards of three selected hospitals in Beijing China. Participants (n = 148) were asked to wear medical masks for a shift (6-8 h) or as long as they could tolerate. Used samples of medical masks were tested for presence of respiratory viruses in upper sections of the medical masks, in line with the pilot studies. RESULTS Overall virus positivity rate was 10.1% (15/148). Commonly isolated viruses from masks samples were adenovirus (n = 7), bocavirus (n = 2), respiratory syncytial virus (n = 2) and influenza virus (n = 2). Virus positivity was significantly higher in masks samples worn for > 6 h (14.1%, 14/99 versus 1.2%, 1/49, OR 7.9, 95% CI 1.01-61.99) and in samples used by participants who examined > 25 patients per day (16.9%, 12/71 versus 3.9%, 3/77, OR 5.02, 95% CI 1.35-18.60). Most of the participants (83.8%, 124/148) reported at least one problem associated with mask use. Commonly reported problems were pressure on face (16.9%, 25/148), breathing difficulty (12.2%, 18/148), discomfort (9.5% 14/148), trouble communicating with the patient (7.4%, 11/148) and headache (6.1%, 9/148). CONCLUSION Respiratory pathogens on the outer surface of the used medical masks may result in self-contamination. The risk is higher with longer duration of mask use (> 6 h) and with higher rates of clinical contact. Protocols on duration of mask use should specify a maximum time of continuous use, and should consider guidance in high contact settings. Viruses were isolated from the upper sections of around 10% samples, but other sections of masks may also be contaminated. HCWs should be aware of these risks in order to protect themselves and people around them.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abrar Ahmad Chughtai
- School of Public Health and Community Medicine, UNSW Medicine, University of New South Wales, Level 2, Samuels Building, Sydney, 2052, Australia.
| | - Sacha Stelzer-Braid
- University of New South Wales, Virology Research Laboratory, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia
| | - William Rawlinson
- SAViD (Serology & Virology Division), Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, Australia
| | - Giulietta Pontivivo
- Infection Prevention Management and Staff Health Services- St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - Quanyi Wang
- Beijing Center for Diseases Prevention and Control, Beijing, China
| | - Yang Pan
- Beijing Center for Diseases Prevention and Control, Beijing, China
| | - Daitao Zhang
- Beijing Center for Diseases Prevention and Control, Beijing, China
| | - Yi Zhang
- Beijing Center for Diseases Prevention and Control, Beijing, China
| | - Lili Li
- Fangshan Center for Diseases Prevention and Control, Beijing, China
| | - C Raina MacIntyre
- Biosecurity Program, The Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.,College of Public Service & Community Solutions, and College of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, 85004, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Chughtai AA, Khan W. Use of personal protective equipment to protect against respiratory infections in Pakistan: A systematic review. J Infect Public Health 2019; 12:522-527. [PMID: 30738757 PMCID: PMC7102795 DOI: 10.1016/j.jiph.2019.01.064] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2018] [Revised: 10/07/2018] [Accepted: 01/21/2019] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Like other low-income countries, limited data are available on the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in Pakistan. We conducted a systematic review of studies on PPE use for respiratory infections in healthcare settings in Pakistan. MEDLINE, Embase and Goggle Scholar were searched for clinical, epidemiological and laboratory-based studies in English, and 13 studies were included; all were observational/cross-sectional studies. The studies examined PPE use in hospital (n = 7), dental (n = 4) or laboratory (n = 2) settings. Policies and practices on PPE use were inconsistent. Face masks and gloves were the most commonly used PPE to protect from respiratory and other infections. PPE was not available in many facilities and its use was limited to high-risk situations. Compliance with PPE use was low among healthcare workers, and reuse of PPE was reported. Clear policies on the use of PPE and available PPE are needed to avoid inappropriate practices that could result in the spread of infection. Large, multimethod studies are recommended on PPE use to inform national infection-control guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abrar Ahmad Chughtai
- School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
| | - Wasiq Khan
- University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Chughtai AA, Chen X, Macintyre CR. Risk of self-contamination during doffing of personal protective equipment. Am J Infect Control 2018; 46:1329-1334. [PMID: 30029796 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2018.06.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 81] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2018] [Revised: 06/02/2018] [Accepted: 06/04/2018] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to describe the risk of self-contamination associated with doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE) and to compare self-contamination with various PPE protocols. METHODS We tested 10 different PPE donning and doffing protocols, recommended by various health organizations for Ebola. Ten participants were recruited for this study and randomly assigned to use 3 different PPE protocols. After donning of PPE, fluorescent lotion and spray were applied on the external surface of the PPE to simulate contamination, and ultraviolet light was used to count fluorescent patches on the skin. RESULTS After testing 30 PPE sequences, large fluorescent patches were recorded after using "WHO coverall and 95" and "North Carolina coverall and N95" sequences, and small patches were recorded after using "CDC coverall and N95" and "Health Canada gown and N95" sequences. Commonly reported problems with PPE use were breathing difficulty, suffocation, heat stress, and fogging-up glasses. Most participants rated PPE high (18/30) or medium (11/30) for ease of donning/doffing and comfort. PPE sequences with powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) and assisted doffing were generally associated with fewer problems and were rated the highest. CONCLUSION This study confirmed the risk of self-contamination associated with the doffing of PPE. PAPR-containing protocols and assisted doffing should be preferred whenever possible during the outbreak of highly infectious pathogens.
Collapse
|