N-95/P2 respirator compliance with fit testing recommendations and respirator satisfaction amongst hospital staff.

BACKGROUND: Filtering Facepiece Respirators (FFRs) are an important and readily scalable infection control measure; however their effectiveness is ultimately determined by compliance. We aimed to examine staff compliance and satisfaction with wearing the N95/P2 FFRs assigned to them via the standardised fit testing protocol implemented in a single large healthcare network in Victoria, Australia. METHODS: In this cross-sectional survey, employees from five hospital campuses who participated in the health networks N95/P2 FFR fit testing process were invited in person to participate in the study. Data were analysed descriptively, after which chi-squared analysis was performed to determine differences between respirator types, gender, and age groups. RESULTS: Amongst the 258 staff members surveyed, 28% had either never or only sometimes worn an FFR to which they had been successfully fit tested, and 11% had experienced facial changes that potentially rendered their most recent fit test invalid. More than half (53%) of those surveyed had experienced side effects, the most common being skin irritation and pressure sores. A majority (87%) of staff felt that wearing an FFR had some impact on their ability to perform their duties. Pooled mean self-reported satisfaction ratings were highest for three-panel flat-fold and duckbill models. CONCLUSION: 28% of HCWs surveyed described not wearing N-95/P2 FFRs for which they had successfully been fit tested. Reasons for non-compliance remain unclear, but rates of side effects and interference with duties were high. Further research is required to determine and address potential causative factors and ascertain ongoing optimal organisation-level fit test strategies.

An Individual Barrier Enclosure Actively Removing Aerosols for Airborne Isolation: A Vacuum Tent.

BACKGROUND: Aerosol barrier enclosure systems have been designed to prevent airborne contamination, but their safety has been questioned. A vacuum tent was designed with active continuous suctioning to minimize risks of aerosol dispersion. We tested its efficacy, risk of rebreathing, and usability on a bench, in healthy volunteers, and in an ergonomic clinical assessment study. METHODS: First, a manikin with airway connected to a breathing simulator was placed inside the vacuum tent to generate active breathing, cough, and CO2 production; high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) was applied in the manikin's nares. Negative pressure was applied in the vacuum tent's apex port using wall suction. Fluorescent microparticles were aerosolized in the vacuum tent for qualitative assessment. To quantify particles inside and around vacuum tent (aerosol retention), an airtight aerosol chamber with aerosolized latex microparticles was used. The vacuum tent was tested on healthy volunteers breathing with and without HFNC. Last, its usability was assessed in 5 subjects by 5 different anesthesiologists for delivery of full anesthesia, including intubation and extubation. RESULTS: The vacuum tent was adjusted until no leak was visualized using fluorescent particles. The efficacy in retaining microparticles was confirmed quantitatively. CO2 accumulation inside the vacuum tent showed an inverse correlation with the suction flow in all conditions (normal breathing and HFNC 30 or 60 L/min) in bench and healthy volunteers. Particle removal efficacy and safe breathing conditions (CO2, temperature) were reached when suctioning was at least 60 L/min or 20 L/min > HFNC flow. Five subjects were successfully intubated and anesthetized without ergonomic difficulties and with minimal interference with workflow and an excellent overall assessment by the anesthesiologists. CONCLUSIONS: The vacuum tent effectively minimized aerosol dispersion. Its continuous suction system set at a high suction flow was crucial to avoid the spread of aerosol particles and CO2 rebreathing.

P2/N95 fit testing and the risk of COVID-19 in Healthcare Workers.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend healthcare workers (HCWs) undertake fit testing of P2/N95 respirators to mitigate the risk of infectious aerosols, however few studies have assessed whether fit testing reduces COVID-19 infection. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted amongst HCWs across two tertiary health services in Melbourne, Australia during a period of low community transmission. Institution-wide quantitative fit testing and detailed questionnaires assessing COVID-19 acquisition risk factors were undertaken from September 2020. HCWs diagnosed with COVID-19 in the period prior to the fit testing program (February 1st - August 31st 2020) were matched on a 1:3 ratio to HCWs who had not been diagnosed with COVID-19. Risk factors for COVID-19 acquisition, including fit testing outcome, were compared between groups. RESULTS: A total of 1571 HCWs took part in fit testing programs. Seventy-two (4.6%) were diagnosed with COVID-19 within the study period. Younger age, nursing staff, close contact with a COVID-19 case, and working longer periods in wards with COVID-19 patients, were associated with COVID-19 infection. After matching for intensity of occupational exposure to infectious aerosols, close contact was the only independent variable associated with COVID-19 infection (OR 3.50, 95% CI:1.65-7.44, p = 0.001). Adequate fit test for the respirator predominately worn before the fit testing period was not associated with COVID-19 (OR 1.08, 95% CI:0.59-1.98, p = 0.815). CONCLUSION: After controlling for intensity of occupational exposure to infectious aerosols, P2/N95 respirator fit testing was not associated with reduced risk of COVID-19 infection. The utility of widespread fit testing to reduce HCW COVID-19 infections should be reconsidered.

Effectiveness of fit testing versus fit checking for healthcare workers respiratory protective equipment: A systematic review.

Objectives: Respiratory protection is critical in healthcare to minimise the risk of airborne infections for healthcare workers (HCWs). It emphasizes the use of proper fitting of particulate filter respirators and equivalent respiratory protective equipment (RPE) to ensure a good facial seal. The systematic review aimed to compare the effectiveness of fit testing and fit checking for HCWs' respiratory protective equipment. Methods: A systematic review of the literature exploring RPE for HCWs to determine the effectiveness of fit-testing versus fit-checking from January 2003 to April 2022 was identified using CINAHL Complete via EBSCO Host, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, and MEDLINE via Ovid electronic databases, and grey literature. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020213968). Results: Of the 561 articles identified in the search, 25 articles (22 quantitative studies and three guidelines) were included in this review. Overall, these studies suggest fit-testing as a method that is more effective, widely adopted, and reliable in assessing the effectiveness of RPE; however, a respiratory program should include both fit-testing and fit-checking to maximise effectiveness of the RPE. The COVID-19 epidemic highlighted a lack of knowledge among HCWs regarding fit-checking and fit-testing, and relevant education increased the effectiveness of respiratory equipment protection. Conclusion: It is imperative that both fit-testing and fit-checking is implemented in order to ensure HCW safety. It is recommended to integrate education, fit-testing and fit-checking into a comprehensive respiratory protective program run by trained fit-testers. There is also a need for practical testing methods that incorporate the clinical environment.

Personal protective equipment during COVID-19: A natural history of dental and dental hygiene regulatory guidance in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Due to the evolving nature of COVID-19, there is evidence that COVID-19-specific infection prevention and control guideline (IPCG) documents formulated for oral health care settings are also changing rapidly. To better inform future policies, a comprehensive review of all IPCG documents across different phases of restrictions for oral health care practitioners is required. TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: A search was performed for documents shared from March 2020 through January 2022 on websites of oral health regulatory authorities in Canada's 10 provinces and 3 territories. The authors performed a narrative review of the identified IPCG documents for dentists (n = 78) and dental hygienists (n = 57). RESULTS: Overall findings from more than 100 IPCG documents distributed during a period of 23 months revealed that the frequency of these updates differed among jurisdictions and between the 2 oral health care practitioners (ie, dentists and dental hygienists) within the same jurisdiction. The most notable observation was the different face-covering recommendations for dentists and dental hygienists within the same jurisdiction during the same timeframe. A common document was sometimes observed for dentists and dental hygienists, however, most jurisdictions had separate IPCG documents. CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The different approaches could have been justified on the basis of prevalence of COVID-19 and availability of personal protective equipment; however, there was a risk of creating confusion about IPCG best practices. The findings of this review will support decision makers when planning future development and dissemination of regulations for all oral health care practitioners.

Surface Contamination of Reusable Respirators and Face Shields During Care of Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients.

BACKGROUND: With the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, healthcare workers (HCW) have relied on reusable personal protective equipment (PPE), including respirators and face shields (FSs). The effectiveness of decontamination procedures outside experimental settings is unclear. We examined the prevalence of surface contamination on reusable PPE used by HCWs at a hospital incorporating daily centralized decontamination and post-use wiping by sampling for common pathogens. METHOD: Samples were collected from HCWs' CleanSpace Halo respirator face masks (FMs) and FSs at the start of shift, immediately after use, and after cleaning with disinfecting wipes. Samples were analyzed for pathogens using the Applied Biosystems™ TaqPath™ COVID-19 Combo Kit and ThermoFisher TaqMan Array Card. Patient charts were reviewed for clinical correlation. FINDINGS: Of the 89 samples, 51 from FMs and 38 from FSs, none tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, despite 58 being obtained from PPE used in the care of patients with COVID-19, many with recent aerosol-generating procedures. Four samples tested positive (4.5%) for Staphylococcus aureus, two each from FMs and FSs. FMs that tested positive were not worn concurrently with FSs that tested positive. The FM and FS samples testing positive were worn in the care of patients without diagnosed S. aureus infection. No FMs tested positive following wipe-based disinfection, but both positive FS samples were found after disinfection wiping. CONCLUSION/APPLICATION TO PRACTICE: Contamination of reusable PPE appears uncommon, especially with SARS-CoV-2, when regular decontamination programs are in place. The rare presence of S. aureus highlights the importance of doffing procedures and hand hygiene by HCW to prevent surface contamination.

Viabilidade e custo-benefício no reúso de respiradores PFF2 durante a pandemia da COVID-19: um estudo multimétodos / Feasibility and cost-effectiveness of reusing PFF2 respirators during the COVID-19 pandemic: a multimethod study

No final do primeiro trimestre de 2020 a Organização Mundial da Saúde reconheceu a contaminação pelo novo SARS-Cov2 como uma pandemia. Diante disso, encontrar alternativas diante das dificuldades de fornecimento de EPIs, incluindo aqueles de difícil fabricação e considerados descartáveis, como os respiradores do tipo N95 e/ou PFF2, tornou-se uma das tarefas difíceis e primordiais para garantir assistência aos pacientes com a doença do coronavírus (COVID-19). Objetivo: Avaliar a segurança no uso de respiradores descontaminados do tipo PFF2, equipamentos de proteção individual (EPIs) considerados de uso único por profissional de saúde em situações de pandemia. Método: Pesquisa de abordagem de multimétodos. O estudo foi dividido em três desdobramentos metodológicos: uma revisão sistemática com metanálise, um estudo com desenho quase-experimental e um estudo de caso. O relatório da revisão sistemática com metanálise foi desenvolvido em oito bases científicas, de acordo com as orientações de Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), com busca de publicações entre janeiro de 2020 e agosto de 2022. A pergunta norteadora foi: o reúso e/ou descontaminação de máscaras N95 viabiliza a manutenção da integridade e eficiência de filtração para os profissionais de saúde na prevenção da COVID-19? A meta-análise foi realizada usando meta-regressão, com variação inversa. A avaliação metodológica dos artigos foi realizada através do instrumento Joanna Briggs critical appraisal para ensaios experimentais não randomizados. O quase-experimento e o estudo de caso foram realizados na Central de Materiais e Esterilização (CME), em um hospital público, universitário e federal da região Sul do Brasil. Foi definido o cálculo do tamanho amostral mínimo de seis respiradores PFF2 para cada tipo de intervenção e tempo de uso para o desenvolvimento do quase-experimento. Este cálculo foi baseado no estudo piloto com máscaras novas com simulação de uso, com análise de potência de 90%, com dois desvios- padrão e com nível de confiança de 95%. As amostras foram coletadas de forma não aleatória, com recrutamento sequencial em duas unidades: Unidade de Terapia Intensiva (UTI não- COVID), na qual os profissionais utilizavam respiradores PFF2 por 42 horas, e a UTI-COVID, na qual as máscaras PFF2 foram utilizadas por 6 horas. O período da coleta foi de 60 dias, entre os meses de abril e junho de 2021. Os critérios de inclusão foram: respiradores do tipo PFF2 fornecidos pela instituição para uso profissional contra agentes biológicos, com laudos de certificação de eficiência bacteriológica, e usados pelos profissionais das UTIs COVID e não- COVID, conforme o protocolo. Os critérios de exclusão foram: respiradores com deformidades ou danificados, com perda de integridade aparente, com marcações que não fossem decorrentes de uso, respiradores valvulados, bem como respiradores da UTI não-COVID descartados com tempo de uso inferior ou superior às 42 horas (7 plantões de 6 horas) preconizadas. Os grupos foram divididos por tempo de uso e tipo de intervenção: Grupo Controle, composto de respiradores novos, e nove grupos experimentais adicionais. Foram consideradas como variáveis dependentes quantitativas: os resultados dos testes de resistência à respiração, à penetração do filtro e à inflamabilidade relacionada à segurança do usuário após o processo de descontaminação de respiradores PFF2. Como variáveis independentes qualitativas foram considerados os tipos de processo de descontaminação. As amostras foram analisadas em laboratório tecnológico de materiais e produtos para o controle da qualidade na cidade de São Paulo, certificado pela Rede Brasileira de Laboratórios de Ensaio (RBLE), com base na norma ABNT NBR 13698/2022, avaliando resistência à respiração com fluxo contínuo de inalação e exalação, penetração através do filtro e inflamabilidade. Os dados foram analisados por meio de estatística descritiva. Para analisar se o respirador permaneceu seguro para o uso após a descontaminação em relação ao grupo controle, foi empregado o teste t Student, para verificar a diferença da resistência à respiração (inalação e exalação) e à penetração do filtro da PFF2 entre os grupos foi utilizado o teste Anova. Foram considerados significativos os valores de p <0,05. Para o estudo de caso, foram aplicadas fontes institucionais, registros de tempo e recursos utilizados para a descontaminação de respirador PFF2. Baseado no modelo de IOWA, foi elaborado o fluxo do processo com a identificação das etapas para viabilizar a descontaminação dos respiradores. Posteriormente, foi elaborada uma planilha para coleta dos dados e comparação dos custos diretos no período pré e durante a pandemia. Quanto aos preceitos bioéticos, esta pesquisa foi orientada pela legislação, aprovada pelo comitê de ética da instituição, CAAE 702207717.4.0000.5327, parecer de aprovação n.2.183.123. Resultados: Como resultados da revisão sistemática, sete artigos foram incluídos na extração dos dados e avaliação crítica, e três na meta-análise. Quatro estudos avaliaram a integridade por inspeção visual e dois por microscopia eletrônica. Não se constatou associação entre o aumento do número de ciclos e a redução da filtração em até 10 ciclos. Nenhum estudo foi considerado de alta qualidade metodológica. Quanto aos resultados do quase-experimento, a resistência à respiração da PFF2 se manteve dentro dos limites preconizados pela norma para os diferentes fluxos de pressão (p<=0,001) na comparação entre as máscaras novas e usadas, independente do tempo de uso. Em relação à manutenção da filtração da PFF2, verifica-se que todos os grupos se mantiveram dentro do limite preconizado de penetração (<6%) utilizando cloreto de sódio em um fluxo contínuo de 95l/min. No entanto, constata-se diferença significativa (p=0,002) entre as máscaras descontaminadas e as novas, independentemente do tipo de tratamento no requisito de penetração. Ao avaliar o tempo de uso, as máscaras descontaminadas e utilizadas por 42h apresentaram, quando comparadas às máscaras novas, diferença significativa na penetração (p=0,012). Em relação ao estudo de caso, afirma-se que, no cenário analisado, o custo do processo de descontaminação de respiradores do tipo PFF2 de uso único durante a pandemia da COVID-19 não é justificável em períodos em que não há escassez de recursos. Conclusão: A partir da revisão sistemática, há evidências da manutenção da integridade e filtração após reúso de respiradores N95/PFF2 para prevenir a COVID-19. O quase-experimento ratificou alguns achados da revisão sistemática, mostrando que a descontaminação de máscara PFF2 é viável nos tipos de descontaminações propostos neste estudo, em situações de pandemia, quando avaliados os requisitos de resistência e manutenção da filtragem em acordo com a norma preconizada. Resíduos de suor e/ou maquiagem não se configuraram como fatores impeditivos para manutenção da filtragem dos respiradores PFF2, além de não terem influenciado no risco de maior ou menor inflamabilidade da máscara. Quanto ao custo do processo de descontaminação desses respiradores, a única justificativa viável para a prática da descontaminação seria a indisponibilidade e o desabastecimento deste EPI.

At the end of the first quarter of 2020, the World Health Organization recognized the contamination by the new SARS-Cov2 as a pandemic. Finding alternatives for the difficulties in providing PPE, including those that are difficult to manufacture and are considered disposable, such as N95 and/or PFF2 respirators, became one of the hardest and fundamental tasks to ensure assistance to patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Objective: To evaluate the safety in the use of PFF2 respirators decontaminated type, personal protective equipment (PPE) considered for one-time use by a health professional in pandemic situations. Method: Research was based on a multimethod approach. This study was developed in three methodological unfoldings: a systematic-metanalysis review, a study with a quasi-experimental design and a case-study. The systematic-metanalysis review report was developed based on the orientations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) on eight scientific basis, looking for publications between January of 2020 and August of 2022. The guiding question was: does the reuse and/or decontamination of N95 masks enable to maintain the integrity and efficiency of filtration for health professionals in the COVID-19 prevention? The metanalysis was carried out using meta-regression with inverse variance. The articles methodological evaluation was performed through the tool Joanna Briggs critical appraisal for not randomized experimental tests. The quasis-experiment and the case study were carried out at the Materials and Sterilization Center, in a public, federal and university hospital in the southern region of Brazil. It was established the sample size calculation minimum of six PFF2 respirators for each type of intervention and time of use for the development of the quasis-experiment. The calculation was based on the pilot study with new masks with simulated use, with power analysis of 90%, with two standard deviations and confidence level of 95%. The samples were collected non-randomly, with sequential recruitment in two units: Intensive Care Unit (non-COVID ICU), in which professionals used PFF2 respirators for 42 hours, and the ICU-COVID, in which PFF2 masks were used for 6 hours. The collection period was of 60 days between the months of April and June of 2021. As inclusion criteria, were used PFF2 respirators for professional use against biological agents provided by the institution, with bacteriological efficiency certification reports, and used by professionals of COVID and non-COVID ICUs, according to the protocol. Exclusion criteria were respirators with deformities or damaged, with apparent loss of integrity, with marks that were not due to use, valved respirators, as well as non-COVID ICU respirators discarded with time of use less than or greater than 42 hours (7 shifts of 6 hours) recommended. The groups were divided by time of use and type of intervention: Control Group, composed of new respirators, and nine additional experimental groups. The following quantitative dependent variables were considered: results of breath resistance tests, of filter penetration and of flammability related to user safety after the decontamination process of PFF2 respirators. As qualitative independent variables, the types of decontamination process were considered. The samples were analyzed in a materials and products technological laboratory for quality control in the city of São Paulo, certified by the Rede Brasileira de Laboratórios de Ensaio (RBLE), based on the ABNT NBR 13698/2022 norm, evaluating the resistance of breathing with a continuous flow of inhalation and exhalation, penetration through the filter and flammability. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. To analyze if the respirator remained safe for use after decontamination compared to the control group T Student test was used to verify the difference of breathing resistance (inhalation and exhalation) and to the penetration of the PFF2 filter was used the ANOVA test. Values of p<0.05 were considered significant. For the case study, institutional sources, time registrations and resources used for the decontamination of PFF2 respirator were applied. Based on the IOWA model, the process flow was elaborated with the identification stages to enable respirators decontamination. Afterwards, a spreadsheet was made to collect data and to compare direct costs in the periods of before and during the pandemic. As for the bioethical precepts, this research was guided by the legislation, approved by the institution's ethics committee, CAAE 702207717.4.0000.5327, approval opinion n.2.183.123. Results: As systematic review results, seven articles were included in the data extraction and critical evaluation, and three articles in the metanalysis. Four studies evaluated the integrity by visual inspection and two studies by electronic microscopy. There was not observed any association between the increase in the number of cycles and the filtration reduction in up to ten cycles. Any study was considered of high methodological quality. As for the quasi-experiment results, the PFF2 breathing resistance remained within the limits recommended by the norm for the different pressure flows (p<=0.001) in the comparison between new and used masks, regardless of the time of use. Regarding the PFF2 filtration maintenance, it is verified that all groups remained within the recommended penetration limit (<6%) using sodium chloride in a continuous flow of 95l/min. However, there is a significant difference (p=0.002) between decontaminated and new masks, regardless of the type of treatment in the penetration requirement. When evaluating the time of use, the masks decontaminated and used for 42 hours presented, when compared to new masks, a significant difference in penetration (p=0.012). Regarding the case study, it is stated that, in the scenario analyzed, the costs of PFF2 respirators decontamination process of single use during the COVID-19 pandemic is not justifiable in periods where there is no resource shortage. Conclusion: From the systematic review, there is integrity and filtration maintenance evidence after the reuse of N95/PFF2 respirators to prevent COVID-19. The quasi-experiment ratified findings of systematic review, showing that PFF2 mask decontamination is practicable in the types of decontamination proposed in this study, in pandemic situations, when the resistance and filtering maintenance requirements were evaluated in accordance with the recommended norm. Sweat and/or makeup residues were not configured as deterrent factors for the filtering of PFF2 respirators maintenance, as well as not influencing the risk of greater or lesser flammability of the mask. In terms of decontamination process cost of single-use PFF2 respirators, the only viable justification for the practice of PFF2 masks decontamination would be the unavailability and shortage of this PPE.

HeLP: Development of occupational protection mask against surgical smoke / HeLP: Desarrollo de máscara de protección ocupacional contra el humo quirúrgico / HeLP: Desenvolvimento de máscara de proteção ocupacional contra a fumaça cirúrgica

ABSTRACT Objectives: to describe a technological innovation in the development of an individual, ergonomic, sustainable and effective occupational respiratory protection mask for workers exposed to surgical smoke. Methods: applied, exploratory, quantitative research, using design methods and tools: Sense Intent, Know Context, Know People, Frame Insights, Explore Concepts, Frame Solutions, Realize Offerings, in addition to the Product Development Process tools. It was developed from March 2019 to December 2021. Results: from the prototyping mold, it became possible to represent the abstract to the physical, where all the concepts created in the methodological steps were implemented and the necessary adjustments were made to create the model as a technological innovation, which will have the concept for product commercialization. Conclusions: a mask for protection against surgical smoke (HeLP) was developed, from the design step to the prototype development, being a technological innovation.

RESUMEN Objetivos: describir una innovación tecnológica en el desarrollo de una máscara de protección respiratoria ocupacional individual, ergonómica, sostenible y eficaz para trabajadores expuestos al humo quirúrgico. Métodos: investigación exploratoria aplicada con un enfoque cuantitativo, utilizando métodos y herramientas de diseño: Sense Intent, Know Context, Know People, Frame Insights, Explore Concepts, Frame Solutions, Realize Offers, además de las herramientas del Proceso de Desarrollo de Producto. Fue desarrollado de marzo de 2019 a diciembre de 2021. Resultados: a partir del molde de prototipado, se logró representar lo abstracto a lo físico donde implementó los conceptos creados en las etapas metodológicas y realizó los ajustes necesarios para la creación del modelo como innovación tecnológica en el cual tendrá el concepto para la comercialización del producto. Conclusiones: se desarrolló una máscara de protección contra el humo quirúrgico (HeLP), desde la etapa de diseño hasta el desarrollo del prototipo, configurando una innovación tecnológica.

RESUMO Objetivos: descrever uma inovação tecnológica do desenvolvimento de máscara de proteção ocupacional respiratória individual, ergonômica, sustentável e eficaz para trabalhadores expostos à fumaça cirúrgica. Métodos: pesquisa aplicada, exploratória com abordagem quantitativa, empregando métodos e ferramentas em design: Sense Intent, Know Context, Know People, Frame Insights, Explore Concepts, Frame Solutions, Realize Offerings, além das ferramentas do Processo de Desenvolvimento de Produtos. Foi desenvolvida no período de março de 2019 a dezembro de 2021. Resultados: a partir do molde da prototipagem, tornou-se possível a representação do abstrato para o físico, onde implementou os conceitos criados nas etapas metodológicas e realizou os ajustes necessários para a criação do modelo como uma inovação tecnológica em que terá o conceito para a comercialização do produto. Conclusões: foi desenvolvida uma máscara de proteção contra a fumaça cirúrgica (HeLP), desde a etapa de projeto até o desenvolvimento do protótipo, configurando-se uma inovação tecnológica.

Children wearing face masks to prevent communicable diseases: scoping review / Uso de máscaras faciais por crianças para prevenção de doenças transmissíveis: scoping review

ABSTRACT Objective: To identify and synthesize scientific evidence that the use of face protection masks by children, in the community and at home, is a way of preventing communicable diseases. Data source: A scoping review was made using the Joana Briggs Institute method and PRISMA-ScR. A research was carried out in five electronic databases, at the Cochrane Library and on seven websites of governmental and non-governmental institutions. The data were organized in a spreadsheet and submitted to narrative analysis. Data synthesis: Initially, 658 productions were identified, of which 19 made up the final sample. Studies with higher levels of evidence are scarce. The types of masks identified were professional (surgical and facial respirators with filtration) and non-professional (homemade). The transmissible agents studied were influenza and SARS-CoV-2 viruses, and the evaluated environments were schools, homes and community spaces. The main discomforts reported were heat, shortness of breath, headache and maladjustment to the face. The indication and acceptability of masks change according to the age group and clinical conditions. There is no consensus on the reduction in the transmissibility of infections. Conclusions: Children older than five can benefit from the correct use of masks, as long as they are supervised, taught and educated to do so and the masks should be well adjusted to the face. The use of masks show better results when associated with other measures such as physical distancing, keeping places ventilated and frequent hand hygiene.

RESUMO Objetivo: Identificar e sintetizar evidências científicas sobre o uso de máscaras faciais de proteção por crianças, na comunidade e no domicílio, como forma de prevenção de doenças transmissíveis. Fontes de dados: Revisão de escopo seguindo o método Joana Briggs Institute e o PRISMA-ScR. Realizou-se pesquisa em cinco bases de dados eletrônicas, na Biblioteca Cochrane e em sete sites de instituições governamentais e não governamentais. Os dados foram organizados em planilha e submetidos à análise narrativa. Síntese dos dados: Inicialmente foram identificadas 658 produções, das quais 19 compuseram a amostra final. Estudos com melhores níveis de evidência são escassos. Os tipos de máscaras identificadas foram as profissionais (cirúrgicas e respiradores faciais com filtragem) e as não profissionais (caseiras). Os agentes transmissíveis estudados foram os vírus influenza e SARS-CoV-2, e os ambientes avaliados foram escolas, domicílios e espaços comunitários. Os principais desconfortos relatados foram calor, falta de ar, dor de cabeça e desajuste ao rosto. A indicação e a aceitabilidade mudam conforme faixa etária e condições clínicas. Não há consenso sobre a redução da transmissibilidade de infecções. Conclusões: Crianças maiores de 5 anos podem se beneficiar com o uso correto de máscaras, desde que sejam supervisionadas e educadas para isso e que a máscara esteja bem ajustada ao rosto. Há melhores resultados quando seu uso está associado a outras medidas, como distanciamento físico, permanência em locais arejados e higiene frequente das mãos.

Functional analysis of a negative pressure airborne infection isolation canopy unit for the prevention of transmission of droplets and aerosols- An experimental study.

Background and Aims: This study describes the functional analysis of a negative pressure canopy unit developed to reduce infective aerosol and droplet spread in ad-hoc wards created to handle patients suffering from infective respiratory illnesses such as those recently encountered in the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: An experimental study was conducted to verify the functional analysis of a canopy unit for the following variables: a) Quantitative and qualitative analysis of aerosol generation, b) Efficacy of canopy as containment device and c) Aerosol clearance from canopy over a period. We describe the process in the form of a problem statement, a discussion of design considerations (including Computer Aided Design modelling and a functional analysis of the system using a variety of simulated conditions which included various experiments for the purpose of testing the safety and efficiency of the system. We also incorporated Computational Fluid Dynamics analyses to assist us in design modifications of the unit using Euler-Lagrange approach for aerosol tracking. Results: As demonstrated by the series of experiments, it was seen that the aerosol load under the testing conditions reduced significantly. The canopy unit restricted the aerosol particles which either got adhered to the canopy walls or went into recirculation inside the canopy. In experimental conditions, the fan-filter unit was able to operate at >95% efficiency. Conclusion: This device exhibited 95-99% efficiency in eliminating aerosols which would reduce the exposure of health care workers to infective aerosols, which is not only specific to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2, but also to other airborne transmitted diseases.

Management of aerosol generation during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

In the highly contagious coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) are associated with high-risk of transmission. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy is a procedure with the potential to cause dissemination of bodily fluids. At present, there is no consensus that endoscopy is defined as an AGP. This review discusses the current evidence on this topic with additional management. Prevailing publications on coronavirus related to upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and aerosolization from the PubMed and Scopus databases were searched and reviewed. Comparative quantitative analyses showed a significant elevation of particle numbers, implying that aerosols were generated by upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The associated source events have also been reported. To reduce the dispersion, certain protective measures have been developed. Endoscopic unit protocols are recommended for the concerned personnel. Therefore, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy should be classified as an AGP. Proper practices should be adopted by healthcare workers and patients.

Prevention of droplet dispersal with 'e-mask': A new daily use endoscopic mask during bronchoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Bronchoscopy is an airborne particle-generating procedure. However, few methods for safe bronchoscopy have been developed. To reduce airborne particles during bronchoscopy, we created an 'e-mask', which is a simple, disposable mask for patients. Our objective was to evaluate the e-mask's protective ability against airborne particles and to assess respiratory adverse events and complications. METHODS: Patients with stage 2-4 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were excluded. We performed visualization and quantifying experiments on airborne particles with and without the e-mask. We prospectively evaluated whether wearing the e-mask during bronchoscopy was associated with the incidence of patients requiring >5 L/min oxygen to maintain >90% oxygen saturation, and patients with >45 mm Hg end-tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO2 ) elevation, in addition to complications, compared to historical controls. RESULTS: In the visualization experiment, more than ten thousand times of airborne particles were generated without the e-mask than with the e-mask. The volume of airborne particles was significantly reduced with the e-mask, compared to that without the e-mask (p = 0.011). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that wearing the e-mask had no significant effect on the incidence of patients requiring >5 L/min oxygen to maintain >90% oxygen saturation, (p = 0.959); however, wearing the e-mask was a significant factor in >45 mm Hg EtCO2 elevation (p = 0.026). No significant differences in complications were observed between the e-mask and control groups (5.8% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.395). CONCLUSION: Wearing the e-mask during bronchoscopy significantly reduced the generation of airborne particles during bronchoscopy without increasing complications.

Evaluation of the Microbiological Effectiveness of Three Accessible Mask Decontamination Methods and Their Impact on Filtration, Air Permeability and Physicochemical Properties.

The need to secure public health and mitigate the environmental impact associated with the massified use of respiratory protective devices (RPD) has been raising awareness for the safe reuse of decontaminated masks by individuals and organizations. Among the decontamination treatments proposed, in this work, three methods with the potential to be adopted by households and organizations of different sizes were analysed: contact with nebulized hydrogen peroxide (H2O2); immersion in commercial bleach (NaClO) (sodium hypochlorite, 0.1% p/v); and contact with steam in microwave steam-sanitizing bags (steam bag). Their decontamination effectiveness was assessed using reference microorganisms following international standards (issued by ISO and FDA). Furthermore, the impact on filtration efficiency, air permeability and several physicochemical and structural characteristics of the masks, were evaluated for untreated masks and after 1, 5 and 10 cycles of treatment. Three types of RPD were analysed: surgical, KN95, and cloth masks. Results demonstrated that the H2O2 protocol sterilized KN95 and surgical masks (reduction of >6 log10 CFUs) and disinfected cloth masks (reduction of >3 log10 CFUs). The NaClO protocol sterilized surgical masks, and disinfected KN95 and cloth masks. Steam bags sterilized KN95 and disinfected surgical and cloth masks. No relevant impact was observed on filtration efficiency.

Uso de elementos de protección personal en la atención del parto vaginal en tiempos de COVID-19 / Use of Personal Protective Equipment When Providing Vaginal Delivery Care in Times of COVID-19 / Uso de elementos de proteção individual na assistência ao parto vaginal em tempos de COVID-19

Introducción. En diciembre de 2019 en Wuhan, China, se presentó un brote de neumonía atípica generado por el virus SARS-CoV-2, el cual es un tipo de coronavirus causante de la enfermedad COVID-19, que se convirtió con el tiempo en una pandemia. En este contexto, el uso de los elementos de protección personal tomó un especial interés, en especial para la atención del trabajo de parto vaginal, dada la confusión en los círculos obstétricos respecto a la mejor forma de proteger al personal sanitario en dichos casos. El objetivo de este artículo de revisión es identificar cuáles son los elementos de protección personal indicados en la atención del parto vaginal y su correcto uso en tiempos de COVID-19. División de temas tratados. Se realizó una revisión narrativa de la literatura accediendo a las bases de datos: PubMed, Medline, Elsevier, Google Académico y sitios web como la Organización Mundial de la salud (OMS), Centros para el Control y la Prevención de Enfermedades (CDC, por sus siglas en inglés) y el Colegio Americano de Obstetras y Ginecólogos (ACOG), entre otros. Se usaron palabras claves como "Infecciones por Coronavirus", "Parto Normal", "Protección Personal", "Personal de Salud", "Dispositivos de Protección Respiratoria" y "Dispositivos de Protección de los Ojos". La literatura permitió identificar aspectos introductorios al tema, epidemiología, características generales de los elementos de protección personal, y los elementos específicos para el uso correcto en la atención del parto vaginal. Conclusiones. El trabajo de parto es considerado como un procedimiento generador de aerosoles, por lo que se recomienda principalmente el uso de tapabocas N95 o un respirador que ofrezca mayor protección para personal de salud en la atención del parto vaginal, con el fin de evitar la infección por SARS-CoV-2; sin embargo, se debe insistir en el uso adecuado y completo de los elementos de protección personal como lo son la bata quirúrgica, el gorro, el protector ocular y guantes, independientemente de la sintomatología de la paciente.

Introduction. In December 2019, in Wuhan, China, there was an outbreak of atypical pneumonia caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which is a type of coronavirus causative of COVID-19, which overtime became a pandemic. In this context, the use of personal protective equipment is of special interest, especially when providing care in vaginal delivery, due to the confusion in obstetric circles regarding the best way to protect healthcare personnel in these cases. The objective of this review article is to identify which are the personal protective elements indicated for providing care in vaginal birth and their correct use during COVID-19. Division of Covered Topics. A narrative review of the literature was carried out, accessing the following databases: PubMed, Medline, Elsevier, Google Scholar, and websites such as the World Health Organization (WHO), Center for the Control and Prevention of Diseases (CDC), and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, among others. Keywords such as "Coronavirus Infections", "Normal Birth," Personal Protective Elements," "Healthcare Personnel", "Respiratory Protective Devices", and "Eye Protection Devices" were used. The literature allowed us to identify introductory aspects on the matter, epidemiology, general characteristics of personal protective elements, and the specific elements for correct use when providing care in vaginal birth. Conclusions. Labor is considered an aerosol-generating procedure. Therefore, the main recommendation is the use of an N95 mask or a respirator which allows for greater protection for healthcare personnel when assisting vaginal birth, in order to avoid infection due to SARS-CoV-2. However, there must be an adequate and complete use of personal protective equipment, such as surgical gowns, hats, eye protection and gloves, regardless of the patient's symptomatology

Introdução. Em dezembro de 2019 em Wuhan, na China, houve um surto de pneumonia atípica gerada pelo vírus SARS-CoV-2, que é um tipo de coronavírus que causa a doença COVID-19, que, com o tempo, acabou se tornando uma pandemia. Nesse contexto, o uso de elementos de proteção individual tornou-se de particular interesse, especialmente para a assistência do parto vaginal, dada a confusão nos círculos obstétricos quanto à melhor forma de proteger os profissionais da saúde nesses casos. O objetivo deste artigo de revisão é identificar os elementos de proteção individual indicados na assistência do parto vaginal e seu uso correto em tempos de COVID-19. Divisão de tópicos abordados. Foi realizada uma revisão narrativa da literatura acessando as seguintes bases de dados: PubMed, Medline, Elsevier, Google Scholar e sites como a Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS), Centros de Controle e Prevenção de Doenças (CDC, na sigla em inglês) e o Colégio Americano de Obstetras e Ginecologistas (ACOG), entre outros. Foram utilizadas palavras-chave como "Infecções por Coronavírus", "Parto Normal", "Proteção Pessoal", "Pessoal de Saúde", "Dispositivos de Proteção Respiratória" e "Dispositivos de Proteção Ocular". A literatura permitiu identificar aspectos introdutórios ao tema, epidemiologia, características gerais dos elementos de proteção individual e elementos específicos para o uso correto na assistência do parto vaginal. Conclusões. O trabalho de parto é considerado um procedimento gerador de aerossóis, portanto, recomenda-se principalmente o uso de máscaras N95 ou um respirador que ofereça maior proteção para os profissionais de saúde na assistência do parto vaginal, a fim de evitar a infecção pelo SARS-CoV-2; no entanto, deve-se insistir no uso adequado e completo de elementos de proteção individual, como bata cirúrgica, touca, protetor ocular e luvas, independentemente dos sintomas do paciente.

An Emergency Powered Air-Purifying Respirator From Local Materials and its Efficacy Against Aerosolized Nanoparticles.

We describe an approach used by a rural healthcare provider to convert surgical helmets into emergency powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. The approach uses common materials and efficacy was demonstrated against aerosols measuring 7 nm to 25 µm in diameter.

Measurement of the Workplace Protection Factor of Replaceable Particulate and Powered Air-purifying Respirators in Japanese Dust-generating Occupations.

Although measuring the workplace protection factor (WPF) is important to verify the performance of particulate respirators in a real work environment, there are no reports of such measurements in Japan. The aim of this study was to measure the WPF of a replaceable particulate respirator (RPR) and a powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR). Eight participants were subjected to three conditions: wearing a RPR correctly (C-RPR), wearing a RPR as usual (but incorrectly) (U-RPR), and wearing a PAPR in the same way as U-RPR (PAPR). Subjects performed dust-generating tasks for 15 min, during which the WPF was measured. The WPF was calculated by dividing the concentration of particles outside the particulate respirator (Co) by that inside the particulate respirator (Ci). A fit testing instrument was used to measure the number of particles. Ci was measured by inserting the test guide into the face piece, and Co was measured by fixing the test guide near the breathing area of the subjects. The WPF geometric mean values (standard deviations) for C-RPR, U-RPR, and PAPR were 17.7 (2.59), 27.0 (3.86), and 117.3 (5.25), respectively. It is important to generate knowledge about the performance of particulate respirators to prevent occupational respiratory diseases.

Estimated N95 Respirator Needs for Nonhealthcare Essential Workers in the United States During Communicable Respiratory Infectious Disease Pandemics.

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, demand for N95 respirators far exceeded the supply, leading to widespread shortages. Initially, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention did not recommend N95 respirators in nonhealthcare settings, in order to reserve them for healthcare workers. As N95s became more available, the recommendations were updated in May 2021 to include N95 respirators for nonhealthcare settings. In this study, we estimated the numbers of N95s needed for nonhealthcare essential workers in the United States. This information is valuable for crisis preparedness and planning for future large-scale communicable respiratory infectious disease epidemics or pandemics. We adapted a spreadsheet-based tool originally built to estimate the potential demand for N95 respirators during an influenza pandemic. We defined nonhealthcare essential occupations according to the 2020 US Department of Homeland Security guidance and used US Bureau of Labor Statistics employment numbers and Occupational Information Network data as model parameters. We modeled minimum, intermediate, and maximum N95 provision scenarios (as 1, 2, and 5 N95 respirators, respectively) per week per worker, for pandemic durations of 15 and 40 weeks. For 85.15 million nonhealthcare essential workers during a 15-week pandemic, an estimated 1.3 billion N95 respirators would be needed under minimum provision scenarios, 2.6 billion for intermediate provision, and 6.4 billion for maximum provision. During a 40-week pandemic, these estimates increased to 3.4 billion, 6.8 billion, and 17 billion. Public health authorities and policymakers can use these estimates when considering workplace respirator-wearing practices, including prioritization of allocation, for nonhealthcare essential workers. Our novel spreadsheet-based tool can also be used to quickly generate estimates of other preparedness and response equipment.

Influence of wearing masks on exhaled air aerodynamics.

Since aerosol inhalation is the most common mechanism for COVID-19 infection, the respiratory protective devices (RPDs) have the highest importance in personal protection. The aim of this study was to assess the efficiency of 10 different RPDs in shortening the travelling distance of exhaled air by range measurement using the schlieren imaging technique. When a RPD is worn by a person resting in a seated position, the expired air does not exceed the human convective boundary layer (CBL). Instead, the CBL lifts the expired aerosols vertically up. Thus, they have a prolonged travelling time in the surrounding air and become less harmful by several mechanisms of virus content decay. Coughing as well as expiration valves can cause far reaching expiration air clouds that cross horizontally the human CBL by opening leakage airway corridors into different directions. Measured by the range of expired air an FFP2 mask provided high security under all conditions tested. A non-vented full-face mask with two viral filters performed even better because of its airtight fit and the excellent filtering capacity of the viral filters during inspiration and expiration, even during cough manoeuvres.

Airborne protection for staff is associated with reduced hospital-acquired COVID-19 in English NHS trusts.

INTRODUCTION: The rate of hospital-acquired coronavirus disease 2019 has reduced from 14.3% to 4.2% over the last year, but substantial differences still exist between English National Health Service (NHS) hospital trusts. METHODS: This study assessed rates of hospital-acquired infection (HAI), comparing NHS hospital trusts using airborne respiratory protection (e.g. FFP3 masks) for all staff, as a marker of measures to reduce airborne spread, with NHS hospital trusts using mainly droplet precautions (e.g. surgical masks). RESULTS/DISCUSSION: The use of respiratory protective equipment was associated with a 33% reduction in the odds of HAI in the Delta wave, and a 21% reduction in the odds of HAI in the Alpha wave (P<0.00001). It is recommended that all hospitals should prioritize airborne mitigation.

CO2 Levels Behind and in Front of Different Protective Mask Types.

Objectives: Many individuals have difficulty adapting to face mask use and report symptoms while using masks. Our primary objective was to determine whether continuous mask-wearing causes elevated levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) behind the facemasks. Methods: CO2 concentrations were measured behind 3 different types of face masks and were compared to CO2 concentrations at the mask front in 261 subjects who continuously wore masks for at least 5 minutes. These CO2 concentrations were also measured in several randomly selected subjects after a 5-minute walk. Results: There were significantly higher CO2 concentrations behind the mask (3176 ppm) compared to the front (843 ppm) with an average of 49 minutes of continuous mask use. Of all the subjects, 76.6% had a behind-the-mask CO2 concentration of more than 2000 ppm (the threshold for clinical symptoms), and 12.2% had a CO2 concentration of at least 5000 ppm (occupational health exposure limit). The CO2 level behind the N-95 masks was highest (especially after exertion) and was lowest behind cloth masks. The combination of warm ambient temperature, an N-95 mask, exercise, and young age appeared to induce exceedingly high CO2 levels that should be avoided. Discussion: Although masks might be necessary for healthcare workers or to lessen the spread of airborne disease, we found that elevated CO2 concentrations were present while wearing them. Elevated CO2 concentrations have historically caused symptoms of CO2 toxicity. Periodic mask breaks in designated areas may be needed to avoid adverse effects. Conclusion: The use of masks increased the CO2 concentration in the air behind them to levels historically associated with toxicity.