Coronavirus antibody positive tests and continued use of personal protective equipment throughout the pandemic

The Impacts of Plastic Waste from Personal Protective Equipment Used during the COVID-19 Pandemic

The period from 2019 to 2022 has been defined by the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in an unprecedented demand for and use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). However, the disposal of PPE without considering its environmental impact and proper waste management practices has become a growing concern. The increased demand for PPE during the pandemic and associated waste management practices have been analyzed. Additionally, the discussion around treating these residues and exploring more environmentally friendly alternatives, such as biodegradable or reusable PPE, is crucial. The extensive use of predominantly non-degradable plastics in PPE has led to their accumulation in landfills, with potential consequences for marine environments through the formation of microplastics. Therefore, this article seeks to establish a connection between these issues and the Sustainable Development Goals, emphasizing the importance of efficient management aligned with sustainable development objectives to address these emerging challenges and ensure a more sustainable future.

Target specific serologic analysis of COVID-19 convalescent plasma

This study compared the performance of four serology assays for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and investigated whether COVID-19 disease history correlates with assay performance. Samples were tested at Northshore using the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 (Roche Diagnostics), Access SARS-CoV-2 IgG anti-RBD (Beckman Coulter), and LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG (DiaSorin) as well as at Genalyte using Maverick Multi-Antigen Serology Panel. The study included one hundred clinical samples collected before December 2019 and ninety-seven samples collected from convalescent plasma donors originally diagnosed with COVID-19 by PCR. COVID-19 disease history was self-reported by the plasma donors. There was no difference in specificity between the assays tested. Clinical sensitivity of these four tests was 98% (Genalyte), 96% (Roche), 92% (DiaSorin), and 87% (Beckman). The only statistically significant differences in clinical sensitivity was between the Beckman assay and both Genalyte and Roche assays. Convalescent plasma donor characteristics and disease symptoms did not correlate with false negative results from the Beckman and DiaSorin assays. All four tests showed high specificity (100%) and varying sensitivities (89-98%). No correlations between disease history and serology results were observed. The Genalyte Multiplex assay showed as good or better sensitivity to three other previously validated assays with FDA Emergency Use Authorizations.

The Utilization of Protective Face Masks among Polish Healthcare Workers during COVID-19 Pandemic: Do We Pass the Exam?

Relevant personal protective measures during the COVID-19 pandemic include face masks, possibly decreasing the risk of infection among the general population and healthcare workers (HCW) if utilized properly. The aim of the study was to assess whether different Polish HCW utilize face masks according to the 2020 World Health Organization guidance (WHO) criteria. This cross-sectional study included 1156 respondents who participated in an internet survey evaluating mask-related behaviors. All the WHO criteria were complied with by 1.4% of participants, regardless of medical profession, specialty or place of employment. HCW mostly adhered to criterion 1 (C1; strict covering of the face and mouth with the mask; 90.8%), C4 (washing/disinfecting the hands after touching/taking off the mask; 49%) and C3 (taking off the mask properly without touching the anterior surface; 43.4%), whereas C2 (avoidance of touching the mask with hands) was complied with least commonly (6.8%). HCW with mask-induced itch (31.6%) complied to C2 less often (odds ratio 0.53; p = 0.01). The study reveals that Polish HCW rarely adhere to all the 2020 WHO guidance criteria on the use of masks, whereas the adherence to particular criteria is variable and may be associated with the presence of skin-related conditions and other factors. Better compliance with the recommendations in the future is necessary to increase personal safety of HCW and prevent the transmission of SARS-CoV-2.