Modeling fomite-mediated SARS-CoV-2 exposure through personal protective equipment doffing in a hospital environment.

Self-contamination during doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE) is a concern for healthcare workers (HCW) following SARS-CoV-2-positive patient care. Staff may subconsciously become contaminated through improper glove removal; so, quantifying this exposure is critical for safe working procedures. HCW surface contact sequences on a respiratory ward were modeled using a discrete-time Markov chain for: IV-drip care, blood pressure monitoring, and doctors' rounds. Accretion of viral RNA on gloves during care was modeled using a stochastic recurrence relation. In the simulation, the HCW then doffed PPE and contaminated themselves in a fraction of cases based on increasing caseload. A parametric study was conducted to analyze the effect of: (1a) increasing patient numbers on the ward, (1b) the proportion of COVID-19 cases, (2) the length of a shift, and (3) the probability of touching contaminated PPE. The driving factors for the exposure were surface contamination and the number of surface contacts. The results simulate generally low viral exposures in most of the scenarios considered including on 100% COVID-19 positive wards, although this is where the highest self-inoculated dose is likely to occur with median 0.0305 viruses (95% CI =0-0.6 viruses). Dose correlates highly with surface contamination showing that this can be a determining factor for the exposure. The infection risk resulting from the exposure is challenging to estimate, as it will be influenced by the factors such as virus variant and vaccination rates.

Preventing Viral Contamination: Effects of Wipe and Spray-based Decontamination of Gloves and Gowns.

We conducted a laboratory simulation to evaluate the contamination of environmental surfaces when using wipe vs spray methods of personal protective equipment (PPE) decontamination. We did not observe any environmental contamination with the bacteriophage MS-2 when bleach solution spray or wipes were used for PPE disinfection.

Assessing Viral Transfer During Doffing of Ebola-Level Personal Protective Equipment in a Biocontainment Unit.

Background: Personal protective equipment (PPE) protects healthcare workers (HCWs) caring for patients with Ebola virus disease (EVD), and PPE doffing is a critical point for preventing viral self-contamination. We assessed contamination of skin, gloves, and scrubs after doffing Ebola-level PPE contaminated with surrogate viruses: bacteriophages MS2 and Φ6. Methods: In a medical biocontainment unit, HCWs (n = 10) experienced in EVD care donned and doffed PPE following unit protocols that incorporate trained observer guidance and alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR). A mixture of Φ6 (enveloped), MS2 (nonenveloped), and fluorescent marker was applied to 4 PPE sites, approximating body fluid viral load (Φ6, 105; MS2, 106). They performed a patient care task, then doffed. Inner gloves, face, hands, and scrubs were sampled for virus, as were environmental sites with visible fluorescent marker. Results: Among 10 HCWs there was no Φ6 transfer to inner gloves, hands, or face; 1 participant had Φ6 on scrubs at low levels (1.4 × 102). MS2 transfer (range, 101-106) was observed to scrubs (n = 2), hands (n = 1), and inner gloves (n = 7), where it was highest. Most (n = 8) had only 1 positive site. Environmental samples with visible fluorescent marker (n = 21) were negative. Conclusions: Among experienced HCWs, structured, observed doffing using ABHR protected against hand contamination with enveloped virus. Nonenveloped virus was infrequent on hands and scrubs but common on inner gloves, suggesting that inner gloves, but not necessarily ABHR, protect against hand contamination. Optimizing doffing protocols to protect against all types of viruses may require reinforcing careful handling of scrubs and good glove/hand hygiene with effective agents.

Modeling the Stability of SARS-CoV-2 on Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).

We modeled the stability of SARS-CoV-2 on personal protective equipment (PPE) commonly worn in hospitals when carrying out high-risk airway procedures. Evaluated PPE included the visors and hoods of two brands of commercially available powered air purifying respirators, a disposable face shield, and Tyvek coveralls. Following an exposure to 4.3 log10 plaque-forming units (PFUs) of SARS-CoV-2, all materials displayed a reduction in titer of > 4.2 log10 by 72 hours postexposure, with detectable titers at 72 hours varying by material (1.1-2.3 log10 PFU/mL). Our results highlight the need for proper doffing and disinfection of PPE, or disposal, to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 contact or fomite transmission.

Potential sources, modes of transmission and effectiveness of prevention measures against SARS-CoV-2.

During the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic new studies are emerging daily providing novel information about sources, transmission risks and possible prevention measures. In this review, we aimed to comprehensively summarize the current evidence on possible sources for SARS-CoV-2, including evaluation of transmission risks and effectiveness of applied prevention measures. Next to symptomatic patients, asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic carriers are a possible source with respiratory secretions as the most likely cause for viral transmission. Air and inanimate surfaces may be sources; however, viral RNA has been inconsistently detected. Similarly, even though SARS-CoV-2 RNA has been detected on or in personal protective equipment (PPE), blood, urine, eyes, the gastrointestinal tract and pets, these sources are currently thought to play a negligible role for transmission. Finally, various prevention measures such as handwashing, hand disinfection, face masks, gloves, surface disinfection or physical distancing for the healthcare setting and in public are analysed for their expected protective effect.

Assessment of Healthcare Worker Protocol Deviations and Self-Contamination During Personal Protective Equipment Donning and Doffing.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate healthcare worker (HCW) risk of self-contamination when donning and doffing personal protective equipment (PPE) using fluorescence and MS2 bacteriophage. DESIGN Prospective pilot study. SETTING Tertiary-care hospital. PARTICIPANTS A total of 36 HCWs were included in this study: 18 donned/doffed contact precaution (CP) PPE and 18 donned/doffed Ebola virus disease (EVD) PPE. INTERVENTIONS HCWs donned PPE according to standard protocols. Fluorescent liquid and MS2 bacteriophage were applied to HCWs. HCWs then doffed their PPE. After doffing, HCWs were scanned for fluorescence and swabbed for MS2. MS2 detection was performed using reverse transcriptase PCR. The donning and doffing processes were videotaped, and protocol deviations were recorded. RESULTS Overall, 27% of EVD PPE HCWs and 50% of CP PPE HCWs made ≥1 protocol deviation while donning, and 100% of EVD PPE HCWs and 67% of CP PPE HCWs made ≥1 protocol deviation while doffing (P=.02). The median number of doffing protocol deviations among EVD PPE HCWs was 4, versus 1 among CP PPE HCWs. Also, 15 EVD PPE protocol deviations were committed by doffing assistants and/or trained observers. Fluorescence was detected on 8 EVD PPE HCWs (44%) and 5 CP PPE HCWs (28%), most commonly on hands. MS2 was recovered from 2 EVD PPE HCWs (11%) and 3 CP PPE HCWs (17%). CONCLUSIONS Protocol deviations were common during both EVD and CP PPE doffing, and some deviations during EVD PPE doffing were committed by the HCW doffing assistant and/or the trained observer. Self-contamination was common. PPE donning/doffing are complex and deserve additional study. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1077-1083.

Assessment of Self-Contamination During Removal of Personal Protective Equipment for Ebola Patient Care.

OBJECTIVE Ebola virus disease (EVD) places healthcare personnel (HCP) at high risk for infection during patient care, and personal protective equipment (PPE) is critical. Protocols for EVD PPE doffing have not been validated for prevention of viral self-contamination. Using surrogate viruses (non-enveloped MS2 and enveloped Φ6), we assessed self-contamination of skin and clothes when trained HCP doffed EVD PPE using a standardized protocol. METHODS A total of 15 HCP donned EVD PPE for this study. Virus was applied to PPE, and a trained monitor guided them through the doffing protocol. Of the 15 participants, 10 used alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR) for glove and hand hygiene and 5 used hypochlorite for glove hygiene and ABHR for hand hygiene. Inner gloves, hands, face, and scrubs were sampled after doffing. RESULTS After doffing, MS2 virus was detected on the inner glove worn on the dominant hand for 8 of 15 participants, on the non-dominant inner glove for 6 of 15 participants, and on scrubs for 2 of 15 participants. All MS2 on inner gloves was observed when ABHR was used for glove hygiene; none was observed when hypochlorite was used. When using hypochlorite for glove hygiene, 1 participant had MS2 on hands, and 1 had MS2 on scrubs. CONCLUSIONS A structured doffing protocol using a trained monitor and ABHR protects against enveloped virus self-contamination. Non-enveloped virus (MS2) contamination was detected on inner gloves, possibly due to higher resistance to ABHR. Doffing protocols protective against all viruses need to incorporate highly effective glove and hand hygiene agents. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;1-6.

Testing for viral penetration of non-latex surgical and examination gloves: a comparison of three methods.

Currently, there are no international standards based on microbiological methodology for testing the ability of medical examination or surgical gloves to prevent the passage of viruses. Three protocols for the direct examination of the viral barrier properties of non-latex gloves were compared with 1080 gloves (270 gloves from each of two surgical brands and two medical examination brands). In two of the methods, gloves were filled with and suspended in a nutrient broth solution, and bacteriophage phiX174 was placed either inside or outside the glove, while the entire test vessel was agitated. Gloves tested using the third method were filled with a suspension of bacteriophage and allowed to rest in a vessel containing nutrient broth. Gloves were tested directly from the manufacturer's packaging, or after being punctured intentionally or subjected to a stress protocol. The passage of bacteriophage was detected with plaque assays. Significant differences in failure rates between glove brands were apparent only among gloves that had been subjected to the stress protocol. Overall, the two methods in which bacteriophage were placed inside the gloves provided more sensitivity than the method in which bacteriophage was spiked into broth outside the gloves. Thus the placement of bacteriophage inside test gloves (or the use of pressure across the glove barrier during testing), and the use of a standardised stress protocol, will improve significantly the ability of a glove test protocol to determine the relative quality of the barrier offered by medical examination and surgical gloves. Further research is needed to provide test methods that can incorporate reproducibly both the use of bacteriophage and simulated glove use in an industrial quality control setting.

Virus transfer proportions between gloved fingertips, soft berries, and lettuce, and associated health risks.

Multiple outbreaks of human norovirus (hNoV) have been associated with fresh produce, such as soft berries and lettuce. Even though food handlers are considered an important source for the introduction of hNoV into food chains, their contribution to public health risks associated with hNoV remains unknown. To assess to which extent food handlers contribute to the introduction and spread of hNoV in fresh produce chains quantitative virus transfer data are needed. We estimated transfer proportions of hNoV GI.4, GII.4, murine norovirus (MNV-1), a culturable surrogate of hNoV, and human adenovirus (hAdV-2), a human pathogen proposed as an indicator for human faecal pollution, between gloved fingertips and raspberries, strawberries, and lettuce, by quantitative RT-PCR and cell culture if applicable. Virus transfer proportions were corrected for virus-matrix specific recoveries, and variability and uncertainty of the parameters were estimated. Virus transfer from gloves to soft berries was generally lower as compared to lettuce, with mean transfer proportions ranging between 0.1 to 2.3% and 9 to 10% for infectious MNV-1 and hAdV-2, respectively. Transfer from produce to glove was mostly greater than transfer from glove to produce, adding to the likelihood of virus transfer due to cross contamination from contaminated produce via food handlers. HNoV GI.4 and hNoV GII.4 showed no significant difference between their mean transfer proportions. Using the estimated transfer proportions, we studied the impact of low and high transfer proportions on the public health risk, based on a scenario in which a food handler picked raspberries with contaminated fingertips. Given the made assumptions, we could show that for a pathogen as infectious as hNoV, low transfer proportions may pose a greater public health risk than high transfer proportions, due to a greater viral spread. We demonstrated the potential of food handlers in spreading hNoV in food chains, showing that prevention of virus contamination on food handlers' hands is crucial for food safety. Nevertheless, complete prevention of virus contamination on fresh produce cannot be achieved in reality, and reliable and effective intervention measures are consequently required. We estimated that, especially for low transfer proportions, a robust one log10-unit reduction of infectious hNoV on contaminated produce, and on food handlers' hands, could lower the public health risk substantially. Using the obtained data in quantitative risk assessment will aid in elucidating the contribution of food handlers in hNoV transmission.

Biaxial flex-fatigue and viral penetration of natural rubber latex gloves before and after artificial aging.

Barrier integrity of unaged and oven-aged (at 70 degrees C) natural rubber latex examination gloves was assessed with a biaxial flex-fatigue method where failure was detected electronically, and by live viral penetration testing performed according to a modified version of ASTM F1671-97a. When no change in barrier properties was detected during flex testing, no virus passage was found after viral challenge. Conversely, when a change in the barrier properties was indicated by the electrical signal, virus passage was found in 74% of the specimens. Flex-fatigue results indicated that unaged test specimens from powdered (PD) and powder-free (PF) nonchlorinated gloves had significantly longer fatigue lives than powder-free chlorinated (CL) gloves from the same manufacturer. Biaxial flexing of oven-aged glove specimens showed a marginal increase in fatigue life for the PF gloves, but no increase for the PD gloves. The fatigue life of the CL gloves was observed to increase significantly after oven aging. However, this appears to be due to a design feature of the test apparatus, wherein peak volume displacement of the worked specimen is held constant. An aging-induced change in the viscoelastic properties of the CL gloves-permanent deformation of the specimens early in the fatigue test-relieves the stress magnitude applied as the test progresses. Thus, permanent deformation acts as a confounding factor in measuring durability of latex gloves by fixed displacement flex-fatigue.

PCR-based method for detecting viral penetration of medical exam gloves.

The test approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for assessment of the barrier quality of medical exam gloves includes visual inspection and a water leak test. Neither method tests directly the ability of gloves to prevent penetration by microorganisms. Methods that use microorganisms (viruses and bacteria) to test gloves have been developed but require classical culturing of the organism to detect it. We have developed a PCR assay for bacteriophage phiX174 that allows the rapid detection of penetration of gloves by this virus. The method is suitable for use with both latex and synthetic gloves. The presence of glove powder on either latex or synthetic gloves had no effect on the ability of the PCR assay to detect bacteriophage DNA. The assay is rapid, sensitive, and inexpensive; requires only small sample volumes; and can be automated.