Healthcare worker infected with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in Korea, 2015

COVID-19-specific adult basic life support guideline strategies for chiropractors and other healthcare providers to maximize the safety and efficacy of resuscitation: a commentary

BACKGROUND

The emergence of an unprecedented novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-C0V-2), which causes the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, has created new scenarios in basic life support (BLS) management. According to current evidence, SARS-CoV-2 can be transmitted airborne in aerosol particles during resuscitation. Research evidence found an alarming global increase in out-of-hospital cardiac arrests during the COVID-19 pandemic. Healthcare providers are legally obliged to respond to cardiac arrest as soon as possible. Chiropractors will likely encounter potential exercise-related and non-exercise-related cardiac emergencies at some point in their professional lives. They have a duty of care to respond to emergencies such as cardiac arrest. Chiropractors are increasingly involved in providing care, including emergency care, for athletes and spectators at sporting events. Also, exercise-related cardiac arrest in adult patients may occur during exercise testing or rehabilitation with exercise prescriptions in chiropractic and other healthcare settings. Little is known about the COVID-19 BLS guidelines for chiropractors. Knowledge of the current COVID-19-specific adult BLS guidelines is essential to developing an emergency response plan for the on-field and sideline management of exercise-related cardiac arrest and non-athletic, non-exercise-related cardiac arrest.

MAIN TEXT

Seven peer-reviewed articles on the COVID-19-specific BLS guidelines, including two updates, were reviewed for this commentary. Responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, the national and international resuscitation organizations recommended interim COVID-19-specific BLS guidelines with precaution, resuscitation, and education strategies. BLS safety is paramount. A precautionary approach with the bare minimum of appropriate personal protective equipment for resuscitation is recommended. There was disagreement among the COVID-19 BLS guidelines on the level of personal protective equipment. All healthcare professionals should also undergo self-directed BLS e-learning and virtual skill e-training. The summarized COVID-19-specific adult BLS guideline strategies and protocols are tabled, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This commentary provides a practical overview and highlights current evidence-based intervention strategies of the COVID-19-specific adult BLS guidelines that may help chiropractors and other healthcare providers reduce BLS-related exposures to SARS-CoV-2 and the risks of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and maximize the efficacy of resuscitation. This study is relevant to and impacts future COVID-19-related research in areas such as infection prevention and control.

Effects of personal protective equipment on cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality and outcomes: A systematic review

Background

The impact of wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) on CPR quality and patient outcomes is unclear. This systematic review aimed to examine whether wearing PPE during resuscitation affects patient outcomes, CPR quality and rescuer fatigue.

Methods

In this review registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022347746), we searched Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane library between 2000 and 2022. The inclusion criteria were studies: in actual or simulated cardiac arrest; comparing PPE with no PPE; and randomised controlled trials and observational studies with a English abstract. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's Risk of Bias-2 and ROBINS-I tools and outcomes assessed with GRADE. We conducted a meta-analysis according to the study design. Quantitative data synthesis was done using a random-effect model incorporating the potential heterogeneity.

Results

A total of 17 simulation-based studies and 1 clinical study were included. All outcomes were judged to be very low certainty of evidence, subject to high risk of bias. The clinical study showed no difference in survival comparing enhanced and conventional PPE. Meta-analysis of 11 RCTs and 6 observational studies found no difference in CPR quality in rescuers wearing PPE compared with no PPE. Pooled rescuer fatigue was significantly worse in the PPE group (mean difference, 2.7 VAS score out of 10; 95% CI, 1.4-4.0).

Conclusions

PPE was not associated with reduced CPR quality or lower cardiac arrest survival. Rescuers wearing PPE may report more fatigue. This finding was mainly derived from simulation studies, additional clinical studies are needed.

Impact of COVID-19 on Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in Korea

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global public health crisis that has had a significant impact on emergency medical services (EMS). Several studies have reported an increase in the incidence of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and a decreased survival due to COVID-19, which has been limited to a short period or has been reported in some regions. This study aimed to investigate the effect of COVID-19 on OHCA patients using a nationwide database.

METHODS

We included adult OHCA patients treated by EMS providers from January 19, 2019 to January 20, 2021. The years before and after the first confirmed case in Korea were set as the non-COVID-19 and COVID-19 periods, respectively. The main exposure of interest was the COVID-19 period, and the primary outcome was prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Other OHCA variables were compared before and after the COVID-19 pandemic and analyzed. We performed a multivariable logistic regression analysis to understand the independent effect of the COVID-19 period on prehospital ROSC.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 51,921 eligible patients, including 25,355 (48.8%) during the non-COVID-19 period and 26,566 (51.2%) during the COVID-19 period. Prehospital ROSC deteriorated during the COVID-19 period (10.2% vs. 11.1%, P = 0.001). In the main analysis, the adjusted odds ratios (AORs) for prehospital ROSC showed no significant differences between the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 periods (AOR [95% confidence interval], 1.02 [0.96-1.09]).

CONCLUSION

This study found that the proportion of prehospital ROSC was lower during the COVID-19 period than during the non-COVID-19 period; however, there was no statistical significance when adjusting for potential confounders. Continuous efforts are needed to restore the broken chain of survival in the prehospital phase and increase the survival rate of OHCA patients.

Effects of SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic on the Mental Health of Spanish Ob-Gyn Specialists-A Nationwide Study

It has been reported that frontline health professionals have suffered from an increased rate of mental disorders as a consequence of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on the mental health of Spanish specialists in the obstetrics and gynecology fields after the fifth Spanish COVID-19 wave.

METHODS

Psychometric screening of the professionals was performed using a nationwide online survey designed by the Psychosocial Obstetrics and Gynecology taskforce. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and general anxiety disorder were screened.

RESULTS

We found high scores for PTSD, depression, and generalized anxiety disorder. Up to 12.4% of specialists met the PTSD criteria, 12.8% showed complex PTSD, 37% showed depression, and up to 37% had a positive screening for generalized anxiety disorder. Our results showed that the pandemic has particularly affected the group of female Ob-Gyn specialists, with significant higher scores in depression and anxiety scales.

CONCLUSIONS

As a lesson learned for the future in case of new health emergencies, it would be very important to provide professionals with adequate psychological support, ensuring enough human and material resources, flexible work shifts, and facilities to reconcile work and family-life, especially in the case of female specialists.

2021 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; First Aid Task Forces; and the COVID-19 Working Group

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation initiated a continuous review of new, peer-reviewed published cardiopulmonary resuscitation science. This is the fifth annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations; a more comprehensive review was done in 2020. This latest summary addresses the most recently published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task force science experts. Topics covered by systematic reviews in this summary include resuscitation topics of video-based dispatch systems; head-up cardiopulmonary resuscitation; early coronary angiography after return of spontaneous circulation; cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the prone patient; cord management at birth for preterm and term infants; devices for administering positive-pressure ventilation at birth; family presence during neonatal resuscitation; self-directed, digitally based basic life support education and training in adults and children; coronavirus disease 2019 infection risk to rescuers from patients in cardiac arrest; and first aid topics, including cooling with water for thermal burns, oral rehydration for exertional dehydration, pediatric tourniquet use, and methods of tick removal. Members from 6 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence, according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, and their statements include consensus treatment recommendations or good practice statements. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections. In addition, the task forces listed priority knowledge gaps for further research.

2021 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; First Aid Task Forces; and the COVID-19 Working Group

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation initiated a continuous review of new, peer-reviewed published cardiopulmonary resuscitation science. This is the fifth annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations; a more comprehensive review was done in 2020. This latest summary addresses the most recently published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task force science experts. Topics covered by systematic reviews in this summary include resuscitation topics of video-based dispatch systems; head-up cardiopulmonary resuscitation; early coronary angiography after return of spontaneous circulation; cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the prone patient; cord management at birth for preterm and term infants; devices for administering positive-pressure ventilation at birth; family presence during neonatal resuscitation; self-directed, digitally based basic life support education and training in adults and children; coronavirus disease 2019 infection risk to rescuers from patients in cardiac arrest; and first aid topics, including cooling with water for thermal burns, oral rehydration for exertional dehydration, pediatric tourniquet use, and methods of tick removal. Members from 6 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence, according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, and their statements include consensus treatment recommendations or good practice statements. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections. In addition, the task forces listed priority knowledge gaps for further research.

The protective effect of tight-fitting powered air-purifying respirators during chest compressions

BACKGROUND

Airborne personal protective equipment is required for healthcare workers when performing aerosol-generating procedures on patients with infectious diseases. Chest compressions, one of the main components of cardiopulmonary resuscitation, require intense and dynamic movements of the upper body. We aimed to investigate the protective effect of tight-fitting powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) during chest compressions.

METHODS

This single-center simulation study was performed from February 2021 to March 2021. The simulated workplace protection factor (SWPF) is the concentration ratio of ambient particles and particles inside the PAPR mask; this value indicates the level of protection provided by a respirator when subjected to a simulated work environment. Participants performed continuous chest compressions three times for 2 min each time, with a 4-min break between each session. We measured the SWPF of the tight-fitting PAPR during chest compression in real-time mode. The primary outcome was the ratio of any failure of protection (SWPF <500) during the chest compression sessions.

RESULTS

Fifty-four participants completed the simulation. Overall, 78% (n = 42) of the participants failed (the measured SWPF value was less than 500) at least one of the three sessions of chest compressions. The median value and interquartile range of the SWPF was 4304 (685-16,191). There were no reports of slipping down of the respirator or mechanical failure during chest compressions.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the median SWPF value was high during chest compressions, the tight-fitting PAPR did not provide adequate protection.

The Error-Prone Operational Steps and Key Sites of Self-Contamination During Donning and Doffing of Personal Protective Equipment by Health Care Workers

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to identify error-prone operational steps and key sites of self-contamination during donning and doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE).

METHODS

A total of 56 health care workers, including 37 nurses and 19 physicians, were recruited to don and doff the PPE recommended by the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Operational errors and sites of self-contamination were recorded using UV-fluorescent labeling and video surveillance.

RESULTS

Three main errors during donning were identified: choosing a loose-fitting coverall that was difficult to handle; ignoring to inspect the seal of N95 respirator or gloves; and forgetting to pull up the zipper completely. Four main errors during doffing were identified: removing the N95 respirator in a wrong way; touching the scrubs with contaminated hands and elbows; touching contaminated external surfaces of the goggles; and performing insufficient hand hygiene. Key sites that were easily contaminated during the doffing of PPE included left hand and wrist, left lower leg, chest, and left abdomen.

CONCLUSION

Identifying the steps prone to errors and key sites of self-contamination in the process of PPE donning and doffing can facilitate the training of PPE use and provide detailed evidence for optimizing standardized protocols to reduce contamination.

The risk of coronavirus to healthcare providers during aerosol-generating procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

CONTEXT:

Several medical procedures are thought to increase the risk of transmission of infectious agents to health-care providers (HCPs) through an aerosol-generating mechanism.

AIMS:

Given the significant influenza and coronavirus pandemics that have occurred in the 20^th and 21^st century, including the current severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 global pandemic, the objective of this analysis is to assess the occurrence of disease transmission to HCPs from the performance aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs).

SETTINGS AND DESIGN:

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis

SUBJECTS AND METHODS:

We performed a systematic meta-analysis looking at the odds ratio (OR) of AGP, causing infection among HCPs. We searched the following databases: MEDLINE (PubMed), ProQuest, Cochrane databases, and the Gray literature (ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform). In addition, we conducted nondatabase search activities. The search terms used were “MERS-CoV,” “COVID,” and “SARS” combined with “provider” or “healthcare provider.”

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED:

RevMan meta-analysis was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS:

Following the search, we reviewed 880 studies, of which six studies were eligible. The estimated odd ratio utilizing a control group of HCPs who were exposed to AGP but did not develop the infection was 1.85 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.33, 2.57). The OR remained the same when we added another control group who, despite not being exposed to AGP, had developed the infection. The OR remained 1.85 (95% CI: 1.33, 2.55). However, there is an increase in the OR to 1.89 (95% CI: 1.38, 2.59) when we added HCPs who did not use adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) during the procedures to the total estimates.

CONCLUSIONS:

The performance of AGP with inadequate PPE can result in an increased risk of disease transmission to HCWs.

Oxygen Therapy and Risk of Infection for Health Care Workers Caring for Patients With Viral Severe Acute Respiratory Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To synthesize the evidence regarding the infection risk associated with different modalities of oxygen therapy used in treating patients with severe acute respiratory infection. Health care workers face significant risk of infection when treating patients with a viral severe acute respiratory infection. To ensure health care worker safety and limit nosocomial transmission of such infection, it is crucial to synthesize the evidence regarding the infection risk associated with different modalities of oxygen therapy used in treating patients with severe acute respiratory infection.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from January 1, 2000, to April 1, 2020, for studies describing the risk of infection associated with the modalities of oxygen therapy used for patients with severe acute respiratory infection. The study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed by independent reviewers. The primary outcome measure was the infection of health care workers with a severe acute respiratory infection. Random-effect models were used to synthesize the extracted data.

RESULTS

Of 22,123 citations, 50 studies were eligible for qualitative synthesis and 16 for meta-analysis. Globally, the quality of the included studies provided a very low certainty of evidence. Being exposed or performing an intubation (odds ratio 6.48; 95% confidence interval 2.90 to 14.44), bag-valve-mask ventilation (odds ratio 2.70; 95% confidence interval 1.31 to 5.36), and noninvasive ventilation (odds ratio 3.96; 95% confidence interval 2.12 to 7.40) were associated with an increased risk of infection. All modalities of oxygen therapy generate air dispersion.

CONCLUSION

Most modalities of oxygen therapy are associated with an increased risk of infection and none have been demonstrated as safe. The lowest flow of oxygen should be used to maintain an adequate oxygen saturation for patients with severe acute respiratory infection, and manipulation of oxygen delivery equipment should be minimized.

Small Particle Aerosol Exposure of African Green Monkeys to MERS-CoV as a Model for Highly Pathogenic Coronavirus Infection

Emerging coronaviruses are a global public health threat because of the potential for person-to-person transmission and high mortality rates. Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) emerged in 2012, causing lethal respiratory disease in »35% of cases. Primate models of coronavirus disease are needed to support development of therapeutics, but few models exist that recapitulate severe disease. For initial development of a MERS-CoV primate model, 12 African green monkeys were exposed to 103, 104, or 105 PFU target doses of aerosolized MERS-CoV. We observed a dose-dependent increase of respiratory disease signs, although all 12 monkeys survived for the 28-day duration of the study. This study describes dose-dependent effects of MERS-CoV infection of primates and uses a route of infection with potential relevance to MERS-CoV transmission. Aerosol exposure of African green monkeys might provide a platform approach for the development of primate models of novel coronavirus diseases.

COVID-19 disease: Resuscitation

COVID-19 is a complex disease which has challenged the way in which care is provided. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is recognized as a potential aerosol-generating procedure, in consequence, a modified advanced life support approach needs to be followed. This article describes the actions for an adult in cardiac arrest with suspected of confirmed COVID-19 disease in a hospital setting.

Study presence of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) in the sweat of patients infected with Covid-19

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) disease, which started in Wuhan, Chin, has now become a public health challenge in most countries around the world. Proper preventive measures are necessary to prevent the spread of the virus to help control the pandemic. Because, SARS-CoV-2 is new, its transmission route has not been fully understood. In this study, we aimed to investigate the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in the sweat secretion of COVID-19 patients. Sweat specimens of 25 COVID- 19 patients were collected and tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by Real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) method. After RNA extraction and cDNA amplification, all samples were examined for the presence of ORF-1ab and N genes related to COVID-19. Results annotated by Realtime PCR machines software based on Dynamic algorithm. The results of this study showed the absence of SARS-CoV-2 in the sweat samples taken from the foreheads of infected people. Therefore, it can be concluded that the sweat of patients with COVID- 19 cannot transmit SARS-CoV-2. However they can be easily contaminated with other body liquids.

Impact of coronavirus syndromes on physical and mental health of health care workers: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Health care workers (HCW) are at high risk of developing physical/mental health outcomes related to coronavirus syndromes. Nature and frequency of these outcomes are undetermined.

METHODS

PRISMA/MOOSE-compliant (PROSPERO-CRD42020180205) systematic review of Web of Science/grey literature until 15th April 2020, to identify studies reporting physical/mental health outcomes in HCW infected/exposed to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome -SARS-, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome -MERS-, Novel coronavirus -COVID-19-. Proportion random effect meta-analyses, I2 statistic, quality assessment and sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

115 articles were included (n=60,458 HCW, age 36.1±7.1, 77.1% female). Physical health outcomes: 75.9% HCW infected by SARS/MERS/COVID-19 reported fever (95%CI=65.9-83.7%, k=12, n=949), 47.9% cough (95%CI=39.2-56.8%, k=14, n=970), 43.6% myalgias (95%CI=31.9-56.0%, k=13, n=898), 42.3% chills (95%CI=20.2-67.9%, k=7, n=716), 41.2% fatigue (95%CI=18.2-68.8%, k=6, n=386), 34.6% headaches (95%CI=23.1-48.2%, k=11, n=893), 31.2% dyspnoea (95%CI=23.2-40.5%, k=12, n=1003), 25.3% sore throat (95%CI=18.8-33.2%, k=8, n=747), 22.2% nausea/vomiting (95%CI=14.9-31.8%, k=6, n=662), 18.8% diarrhoea (95%CI=11.9-28.4%, k=9, n=824). Mental health outcomes: 62.5% HCW exposed to SARS/MERS/COVID-19 reported general health concerns (95%CI=57.0-67,8%, k=2, n=2254), 43.7% fear (95%CI=33.9-54.0%, k=4, n=584), 37.9% insomnia (95%CI=30.9-45.5%, k=6, n=5067), 37.8% psychological distress (95%CI=28.4-48.2%, k=15, n=24,346), 34.4% burnout (95%CI=19.3-53.5%, k=3, n=1337), 29.0% anxiety features (95%CI=14.2-50.3%, k=6, n=9191), 26.3% depressive symptoms (95%CI=12.5-47.1%, k=8, n=9893), 20.7% post-traumatic stress disorder features (95%CI=13.2-31%, k=11, n=3826), 16.1% somatisation (95%CI=0.2-96.0%, k=2, n=2184), 14.0% stigmatisation feelings (95%CI=6.4-28.1%, k=2, n=411).

LIMITATIONS

Limited amount of evidence for some outcomes and suboptimal design in several studies included.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS/MERS/COVID-19 have a substantial impact on the physical and mental health of HCW, which should become a priority for public health strategies.

CODE BLUE-19: A Proposed Protocol to Mitigate COVID-19 Transmission in the Emergency Department when Receiving Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest Patients

Resuscitation of cardiac arrest in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients places the healthcare staff at higher risk of exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Unfortunately, COVID-19 status is unknown in most patients presenting to the emergency department (ED), and therefore special attention must be given to protect the healthcare staff along with the other patients. This is particularly true for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients who are transported to the ED. Based on the current data available on transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2, we have proposed a protocolized approach to out-of-hospital cardiac arrests to limit risk of transmission.

Should chest compressions be considered an aerosol-generating procedure? A literature review in response to recent guidelines on personal protective equipment for patients with suspected COVID-19

There is disagreement between international guidelines on the level of personal protective equipment (PPE) required for chest compressions for patients with suspected COVID-19. This discrepancy centres on whether they are considered to be an aerosol-generating procedure (AGP), thus requiring airborne protection to prevent transmission to healthcare workers (HCWs). The need to don higher-level PPE has to be weighed against the resulting delay to emergency treatment.We performed a literature search on this topic which found eight relevant studies. All were observational with low patient numbers and multiple confounding factors, but describe cases of acute respiratory infection transmission during chest compressions. One systematic review concluded that chest compressions were not an AGP. Two simulated studies (released as preprints) potentially demonstrate aerosol generation. Given that there is evidence for infection transmission during chest compressions, we conclude that a precautionary approach with appropriate PPE is necessary to protect HCW from contracting a potentially fatal infection.

Preparedness of personal protective equipment and implementation of new CPR strategies for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the COVID-19 era

BACKGROUND

In February and March 2020, healthcare providers and citizens in Daegu, South Korea, experienced the onslaught of a large-scale community epidemic of COVID-19. This had a profound impact on patients who experienced out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational study of 171 OHCA patients based on the multicenter WinCOVID registry. Demographic and clinical characteristics, overall survival, COVID-19 related data, as well as personal protective equipment (PPE) and resuscitation techniques used during the COVID-19 outbreak were evaluated and compared with outcomes from a 2018 historical cohort (n ​= ​158).

RESULTS

Among the interventions, high-level PPE was introduced and standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation was changed to chest compressions using mechanical devices. All OHCA patients were treated as confirmed or suspicious for COVID-19 regardless of symptoms. Furthermore, complete or partial closures of emergency centers and the number of medical personnel requiring self-isolation decreased in response to the introduction of isolated resuscitation units. However, the adjusted odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals for survival discharge and favorable neurologic outcome were 0.51 (0.25-0.97) and 0.45 (0.21-1.07) compared with those in the 2018 historical cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Responses to the COVID-19 pandemic included changes to current PPE strategies and introduction of isolated resuscitation units; the latter intervention reduced the number of unexpected closures and quarantines of emergency resources early on during the COVID-19 outbreak. Given the possibility of future outbreaks, we need to have revised resuscitation strategies and the capacity to commandeer emergency resources for OHCA patients.

Welche Schutzmaske schützt vor COVID-19? Was ist evidenzbasiert?

Die COVID-19-Pandemie hat sowohl in der Patientenversorgung als auch in der Öffentlichkeit zu Diskussionen geführt, mit welchen Schutzmasken man sich vor einer Ansteckung schützen kann. Ähnliche Diskussionen hatte es schon 2009/10 im Rahmen der damals weltweiten Ausbreitung einer neuen Variante des Influenzavirus A (H1N1) gegeben („Schweinegrippe“). Auffällig sind damals wie heute Unklarheiten und Verwirrungen in Bezug auf die Übertragungswege von Atemwegsinfektionen und über die sich daraus ableitenden Schutzmaßnahmen.

Ventilation Techniques and Risk for Transmission of Coronavirus Disease, Including COVID-19: A Living Systematic Review of Multiple Streams of Evidence

BACKGROUND

Mechanical ventilation is used to treat respiratory failure in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

PURPOSE

To review multiple streams of evidence regarding the benefits and harms of ventilation techniques for coronavirus infections, including that causing COVID-19.

DATA SOURCES

21 standard, World Health Organization-specific and COVID-19-specific databases, without language restrictions, until 1 May 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies of any design and language comparing different oxygenation approaches in patients with coronavirus infections, including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), or with hypoxemic respiratory failure. Animal, mechanistic, laboratory, and preclinical evidence was gathered regarding aerosol dispersion of coronavirus. Studies evaluating risk for virus transmission to health care workers from aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Independent and duplicate screening, data abstraction, and risk-of-bias assessment (GRADE for certainty of evidence and AMSTAR 2 for included systematic reviews).

DATA SYNTHESIS

123 studies were eligible (45 on COVID-19, 70 on SARS, 8 on MERS), but only 5 studies (1 on COVID-19, 3 on SARS, 1 on MERS) adjusted for important confounders. A study in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 reported slightly higher mortality with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) than with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), but 2 opposing studies, 1 in patients with MERS and 1 in patients with SARS, suggest a reduction in mortality with NIV (very-low-certainty evidence). Two studies in patients with SARS report a reduction in mortality with NIV compared with no mechanical ventilation (low-certainty evidence). Two systematic reviews suggest a large reduction in mortality with NIV compared with conventional oxygen therapy. Other included studies suggest increased odds of transmission from AGPs.

LIMITATION

Direct studies in COVID-19 are limited and poorly reported.

CONCLUSION

Indirect and low-certainty evidence suggests that use of NIV, similar to IMV, probably reduces mortality but may increase the risk for transmission of COVID-19 to health care workers.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

World Health Organization. (PROSPERO: CRD42020178187).

European Resuscitation Council COVID-19 guidelines executive summary

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a substantial impact on the incidence of cardiac arrest and survival. The challenge is to find the correct balance between the risk to the rescuer when undertaking cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) on a person with possible COVID-19 and the risk to that person if CPR is delayed. These guidelines focus specifically on patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. The guidelines include the delivery of basic and advanced life support in adults and children and recommendations for delivering training during the pandemic. Where uncertainty exists treatment should be informed by a dynamic risk assessment which may consider current COVID-19 prevalence, the person's presentation (e.g. history of COVID-19 contact, COVID-19 symptoms), likelihood that treatment will be effective, availability of personal protective equipment (PPE) and personal risks for those providing treatment. These guidelines will be subject to evolving knowledge and experience of COVID-19. As countries are at different stages of the pandemic, there may some international variation in practice.

What proportion of healthcare worker masks carry virus? A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Concerns have been raised by healthcare organisations in New Zealand that routine mask use by healthcare workers (HCW) may increase the risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 through increased face touching. Routine mask use by frontline HCW was not recommended when seeing 'low risk' patients. The aim of this review was to determine the carriage of respiratory viruses on facemasks used by HCW.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted with structured searches of medical and allied health databases. Two authors independently screened articles for inclusion, with substantial agreement (k = 0.66, 95% CI 0.54-0.79). Studies that at least one author recommended for full text review were reviewed in full for inclusion. Two authors independently extracted data from included studies including the setting, method of analysis and results. There was exact agreement on the proportion of virus detected on masks.

RESULTS

We retrieved 1233 titles, 47 underwent full text review and five studies reported in four articles were included. The studies were limited by small numbers and failure to test all eligible masks in some studies. The proportion in each study ranged from 0 (95% CI 0-10) to 25% (95% CI 8-54). No study reported clinical respiratory illness as a result of virus on the masks.

CONCLUSIONS

Although limited, current evidence suggests that viral carriage on the outer surface of surgical masks worn by HCW treating patients with clinical respiratory illness is low and there was not strong evidence to support the assumption that mask use may increase the risk of viral transmission.

Is sweat a possible route of transmission of SARS-CoV-2?

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused a global pandemic, in part due to the highly infectious nature of the disease. Because SARS-CoV-2 is new, much is unknown regarding mechanisms of transmission, and such information is urgently needed. Here, based on previous findings from related human betacoronaviruses, it is suggested that one possible route of transmission may be via infectious sweat. It is suggested that research be conducted in order to determine whether sweat in SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals harbors virus in quantities that can infect others. Findings could be used for formulations of mitigation strategies and empirically based public health messaging.

[Nursing care for controlling coronavirus infections in positive cases: a narrative review]

Objetivo

Esta revisión tiene como objetivo realizar un mapeado de evidencias científicas en cuidados enfermeros dirigidos a controlar infecciones por coronavirus.

Método

Se llevó a cabo una búsqueda bibliográfica en las bases de datos Medline, CINAHL, Scopus y en la colección principal de la WOS, sin límite de fecha y a través de las palabras clave «transmission», «infection», «contagious», «spreads», «coronavirinae», «coronavirus», «covid 19», «sars cov 2», «nurses» y «nursing». Inicialmente se identificaron 154 estudios y, tras seleccionarlos según criterios de elegibilidad, se incluyeron 16.

Resultados

Entre las recomendaciones principales, según la evidencia disponible, se encuentran el intercambio de aire en las habitaciones como medida para reducir el riesgo de contagio entre pacientes; el refuerzo de medidas en unidades de cuidados intensivos; seguimiento de contactos de casos positivos; y una adecuada formación de los profesionales.

Discusión y conclusiones

Los estudios incluidos en la revisión trataron sobre prácticas de prevención y control de contagios, analizando riesgos asociados a la exposición y enumerando acciones para evitar complicaciones en pacientes críticos. Se identificaron patrones de transmisión de casos, contactos y factores asociados. También se estudiaron los conocimientos y actitudes profesionales, mostrando la importancia de una buena formación para el control de infecciones, y de disponer de equipos suficientes y adecuadas infraestructuras.

Las enfermeras son vectores importantes de propagación. A pesar de que la evidencia disponible sobre la efectividad de cuidados para evitar el contagio por SARS-CoV-2 es escasa, los estudios publicados sobre la prevención y control ante brotes anteriores por coronavirus son de considerable utilidad.

COVID-19 in cardiac arrest and infection risk to rescuers: A systematic review

Background

There may be a risk of COVID-19 transmission to rescuers delivering treatment for cardiac arrest. The aim of this review was to identify the potential risk of transmission associated with key interventions (chest compressions, defibrillation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation) to inform international treatment recommendations.

Methods

We undertook a systematic review comprising three questions: (1) aerosol generation associated with key interventions; (2) risk of airborne infection transmission associated with key interventions; and (3) the effect of different personal protective equipment strategies. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the World Health Organization COVID-19 database on 24th March 2020. Eligibility criteria were developed individually for each question. We assessed risk of bias for individual studies, and used the GRADE process to assess evidence certainty by outcome.

Results

We included eleven studies: two cohort studies, one case control study, five case reports, and three manikin randomised controlled trials. We did not find any direct evidence that chest compressions or defibrillation either are or are not associated with aerosol generation or transmission of infection. Data from manikin studies indicates that donning of personal protective equipment delays treatment delivery. Studies provided only indirect evidence, with no study describing patients with COVID-19. Evidence certainty was low or very low for all outcomes.

Conclusion

It is uncertain whether chest compressions or defibrillation cause aerosol generation or transmission of COVID-19 to rescuers. There is very limited evidence and a rapid need for further studies.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42020175594.

N95 filtering facepiece respirators do not reliably afford respiratory protection during chest compression: A simulation study

Background

N95 filtering facepiece respirators (N95 respirators) may not provide adequate protection against respiratory infections during chest compression due to inappropriate fitting.

Methods

This was a single-center simulation study performed from December 1, 2016, to December 31, 2016. Each participant underwent quantitative fit test (QNFT) of N95 respirators according to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration protocol. Adequacy of respirator fit was represented by the fit factor (FF), which is calculated as the number of ambient particles divided by the number inside the respirator. We divided all participants into the group that passed the overall fit test but failed at least one individual exercise (partially passed group [PPG]) and the group that passed all exercises (all passed group [APG]). Then, the participants performed three sessions of continuous chest compressions, each with a duration of 2 min, while undergoing real-time fit testing. The primary outcome was any failure (FF < 100) of the fit test during the three bouts of chest compression.

Results

Forty-four participants passed the QNFT. Overall, 73% (n = 32) of the participants failed at least one of the three sessions of chest compression; the number of participants who failed was significantly higher in the PPG than in the APG (94% vs. 61%; p = 0.02). Approximately 18% (n = 8) of the participants experienced mask fit failures, such as strap slipping.

Conclusions

Even if the participants passed the QNFT, the N95 respirator did not provide adequate protection against respiratory infections during chest compression.

Middle East respiratory syndrome: what we learned from the 2015 outbreak in the Republic of Korea

Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) was first isolated from a patient with severe pneumonia in 2012. The 2015 Korea outbreak of MERSCoV involved 186 cases, including 38 fatalities. A total of 83% of transmission events were due to five superspreaders, and 44% of the 186 MERS cases were the patients who had been exposed in nosocomial transmission at 16 hospitals. The epidemic lasted for 2 months and the government quarantined 16,993 individuals for 14 days to control the outbreak. This outbreak provides a unique opportunity to fill the gap in our knowledge of MERS-CoV infection. Therefore, in this paper, we review the literature on epidemiology, virology, clinical features, and prevention of MERS-CoV, which were acquired from the 2015 Korea outbreak of MERSCoV.