A time-motion study on impact of spatial separation for empiric airborne precautions in emergency department length of stay.

AIMS: To evaluate the impact of spatial separation on patient flow in the emergency department. DESIGN: This was a retrospective, time-and-motion analysis conducted from 15 to 22 August, 2022 at the emergency department of a tertiary hospital in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. During this duration, spatial separation was implemented in critical and semi-critical zones to separate patients with symptoms of respiratory infections into respiratory area, and patients without into non-respiratory area. This study adhered to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines. METHODS: Patients triaged to critical and semi-critical zones were included in this study. Timestamps of patient processes in emergency department until patient departure were documented. RESULTS: The emergency department length-of-stay was longer in respiratory area compared to non-respiratory area; 527 min (381-698) versus 390 min (285-595) in critical zone and 477 min (312-739) versus 393 min (264-595) in semi-critical zone. In critical zone, time intervals of critical flow processes and compliance to hospital benchmarks were similar in both areas. More patients in respiratory area were managed within the arrival-to-contact ≤30 min benchmark and more patients in non-respiratory area had emergency department length-of-stay ≤8 h. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of spatial separation in infection control should address decision-to-departure delays to minimise emergency department length of stay. IMPACT: The study evaluated the impact of spatial separation on patient flow in the emergency department. Emergency department length-of-stay was significantly prolonged in the respiratory area. Hospital administrators and policymakers can optimise infection control protocols measures in emergency departments, balancing infection control measures with efficient patient care delivery. REPORTING METHOD: STROBE guidelines. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: None. TRIAL AND PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The study obtained ethics approval from the institution's Medical Ethics Committee (MREC ID NO: 20221113-11727). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The author has checked and make sure our submission has conformed to the Journal's statistical guideline. There is a statistician on the author team (Noor Azhar).

COVID-19 aerosol box as protection from droplet and aerosol contaminations in healthcare workers performing airway intubation: a randomised cross-over simulation study.

BACKGROUND: Concerns over high transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2 have led to innovation and usage of an aerosol box to protect healthcare workers during airway intubation in patients with COVID-19. Its efficacy as a barrier protection in addition to the use of a standard personal protective equipment (PPE) is not fully known. We performed a simulated study to investigate the relationship between aerosol box usage during intubation and contaminations on healthcare workers pre-doffing and post-doffing of PPE. METHODS: This was a randomised cross-over study conducted between 9 April to 5 May 2020 in the ED of University Malaya Medical Centre. Postgraduate Emergency Medicine trainees performed video laryngoscope-assisted intubation on an airway manikin with and without an aerosol box in a random order. Contamination was simulated by nebulised Glo Germ. Primary outcome was number of contaminated front and back body regions pre-doffing and post-doffing of PPE of the intubator and assistant. Secondary outcomes were intubation time, Cormack-Lehane score, number of intubation attempts and participants' feedback. RESULTS: Thirty-six trainees completed the study interventions. The number of contaminated front and back body regions pre-doffing of PPE was significantly higher without the aerosol box (all p values<0.001). However, there was no significant difference in the number of contaminations post-doffing of PPE between using and not using the aerosol box, with a median contamination of zero. Intubation time was longer with the aerosol box (42.5 s vs 35.5 s, p<0.001). Cormack-Lehane scores were similar with and without the aerosol box. First-pass intubation success rate was 94.4% and 100% with and without the aerosol box, respectively. More participants reported reduced mobility and visibility when intubating with the aerosol box. CONCLUSIONS: An aerosol box may significantly reduce exposure to contaminations but with increased intubation time and reduced operator's mobility and visibility. Furthermore, the difference in degree of contamination between using and not using an aerosol box could be offset by proper doffing of PPE.

Precursors to non-invasive clinical dengue screening: Multivariate signature analysis of in-vivo diffuse skin reflectance spectroscopy on febrile patients in Malaysia.

Dengue diagnostics have come a long way. Attempts at breaking away from lab-oriented dengue detection, such as NS1 antigen, IgM or IgG antibodies detection have extensively received numerous coverage. As a result, rapid detection tests (RDTs) have started to gain inroads in medical practice. Rapid detection tests notwithstanding, analysis of blood serum is still a relatively complicated task. This includes the necessity of phlebotomy, centrifugation for blood serum, and other reagent-based tests. Therefore, a non-invasive method of dengue detection was considered. In this study, we present the utility of diffuse reflectance skin spectroscopy (bandwidth of 200-2500nm) on the forearm during the triaging period for dengue screening potential. This is performed with multivariate analysis of 240 triaged febrile/suspected dengue patients. The data is then scrutinized for its clinical validity to be included as either confirmed or probable dengue, or a control group. Based on discriminant analysis of several data normalization models, we can predict the patients' clinical dengue-positivity at ranges of accuracy between ~93-98% depending on mode of the data, with a probably optimal sensitivity and specificity to the clinical diagnosis of ~89% and ~100% respectively. From the outcomes of this study, we recommend further trials with cautious optimism. With these findings, it is hoped that the elusive non-invasive detection of tropical diseases may gain platform in the near future.