Masks and Face Coverings for the Lay Public : A Narrative Update.

Whether and when to mandate the wearing of facemasks in the community to prevent the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 remains controversial. Published literature across disciplines about the role of masks in mitigating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission is summarized. Growing evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is airborne indicates that infection control interventions must go beyond contact and droplet measures (such as handwashing and cleaning surfaces) and attend to masking and ventilation. Observational evidence suggests that masks work mainly by source control (preventing infected persons from transmitting the virus to others), but laboratory studies of mask filtration properties suggest that they could also provide some protection to wearers (protective effect). Even small reductions in individual transmission could lead to substantial reductions in population spread. To date, only 1 randomized controlled trial has examined a community mask recommendation. This trial did not identify a significant protective effect and was not designed to evaluate source control. Filtration properties and comfort vary widely across mask types. Masks may cause discomfort and communication difficulties. However, there is no evidence that masks result in significant physiologic decompensation or that risk compensation and fomite transmission are associated with mask wearing. The psychological effects of masks are culturally shaped; they may include threats to autonomy, social relatedness, and competence. Evidence suggests that the potential benefits of wearing masks likely outweigh the potential harms when SARS-CoV-2 is spreading in a community. However, mask mandates involve a tradeoff with personal freedom, so such policies should be pursued only if the threat is substantial and mitigation of spread cannot be achieved through other means.

Risk for Fomite-Mediated Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in Child Daycares, Schools, Nursing Homes, and Offices.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 can persist on surfaces, suggesting possible surface-mediated transmission of this pathogen. We found that fomites might be a substantial source of transmission risk, particularly in schools and child daycares. Combining surface cleaning and decontamination with mask wearing can help mitigate this risk.

Characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 Transmission among Meat Processing Workers in Nebraska, USA, and Effectiveness of Risk Mitigation Measures.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has severely impacted the meat processing industry in the United States. We sought to detail demographics and outcomes of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infections among workers in Nebraska meat processing facilities and determine the effects of initiating universal mask policies and installing physical barriers at 13 meat processing facilities. During April 1-July 31, 2020, COVID-19 was diagnosed in 5,002 Nebraska meat processing workers (attack rate 19%). After initiating both universal masking and physical barrier interventions, 8/13 facilities showed a statistically significant reduction in COVID-19 incidence in <10 days. Characteristics and incidence of confirmed cases aligned with many nationwide trends becoming apparent during this pandemic: specifically, high attack rates among meat processing industry workers, disproportionately high risk of adverse outcomes among ethnic and racial minority groups and men, and effectiveness of using multiple prevention and control interventions to reduce disease transmission.

Aerosols Produced by Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Quantitative Evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, whether endoscopy generates aerosols needs to be determined. METHODS: In patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with an enclosure covering their heads, 0.3-10-µm aerosols were measured for 60 seconds before, during, and after endoscopy by an optical counter. Whether aerosols increased in the situation with and without endoscopy was examined. RESULTS: The analysis included 103 consecutive patients undergoing endoscopy and 90 control patients. Aerosols increased significantly during endoscopy compared with the control group. Body mass index and burping were significant factors related to increased aerosols during endoscopy. DISCUSSION: Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was an aerosol-generating procedure.

Novel Negative Pressure Protective Box in Upper Digestive Endoscopy: A Prospective Case Series.

In the context of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 pandemic, we have developed a novel negative pressure aerosol protector for upper endoscopy (TRACEY). TRACEY is the first endoscopic enclosure to have passed stringent testing for aerosol protection. The following describes its clinical use in a single-center prospective case series. Overall, 15 patients were included. All endoscopic procedures were successful without premature removal of TRACEY. In addition, its use did not lead to significant patient discomfort, technical hinderance, or adverse events. TRACEY seems to offer a safe and easy to use aerosol protection for upper endoscopy and a potential Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 mitigation strategy in endoscopy.

Aerosols, airflow, and airspace contamination during laparoscopy.

Laparoscopic surgery has been undermined throughout the COVID-19 pandemic by concerns that it may generate an infectious risk to the operating team through aerosolization of peritoneal particles. There is anyway a need for increased awareness and understanding of the occupational hazard for surgical teams regarding unfiltered escape of pollutants generated by surgical smoke and other microbials. Here, the aerosol-generating nature of this access modality was confirmed through repeatable real-time methodology both qualitatively and quantitively to inform best practice and additional engineering solutions to optimize the operating room environment.

Laparoscopic surgery has been undermined throughout the COVID-19 pandemic by concerns that it may generate an infectious risk to the operating team through aerosolization of peritoneal particles. There is anyway a need for increased awareness and understanding of the occupational hazard for surgical teams regarding unfiltered escape of pollutants generated by surgical smoke and other microbials. Here, the aerosol-generating nature of this access modality was confirmed through repeatable real-time methodology both qualitatively and quantitively to inform best practice and additional engineering solutions to optimize the operating room environment.

Improved Testing and Design of Intubation Boxes During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, many emergency departments have been using passive protective enclosures ("intubation boxes") during intubation. The effectiveness of these enclosures remains uncertain. We sought to quantify their ability to contain aerosols using industry standard test protocols. METHODS: We tested a commercially available passive protective enclosure representing the most common design and compared this with a modified enclosure that incorporated a vacuum system for active air filtration during simulated intubations and negative-pressure isolation. We evaluated the enclosures by using the same 3 tests air filtration experts use to certify class I biosafety cabinets: visual smoke pattern analysis using neutrally buoyant smoke, aerosol leak testing using a test aerosol that mimics the size of virus-containing particulates, and air velocity measurements. RESULTS: Qualitative evaluation revealed smoke escaping from all passive enclosure openings. Aerosol leak testing demonstrated elevated particle concentrations outside the enclosure during simulated intubations. In contrast, vacuum-filter-equipped enclosures fully contained the visible smoke and test aerosol to standards consistent with class I biosafety cabinet certification. CONCLUSION: Passive enclosures for intubation failed to contain aerosols, but the addition of a vacuum and active air filtration reduced aerosol spread during simulated intubation and patient isolation.

Mobile isolation wards in a fever clinic: a novel operation model during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A fever clinic within a hospital plays a vital role in pandemic control because it serves as an outpost for pandemic discovery, monitoring and handling. As the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan was gradually brought under control, the fever clinic in the West Campus of Wuhan Union Hospital introduced a new model for construction and management of temporary mobile isolation wards. A traditional battlefield hospital model was combined with pandemic control regulations, to build a complex of mobile isolation wards that used adaptive design and construction for medical operational, medical waste management and water drainage systems. The mobile isolation wards allowed for the sharing of medical resources with the fever clinic. This increased the capacity and efficiency of receiving, screening, triaging and isolation and observation of patients with fever. The innovative mobile isolation wards also controlled new sudden outbreaks of COVID-19. We document the adaptive design and construction model of the novel complex of mobile isolation wards and explain its characteristics, functions and use.

Minimizing endoscopist facial exposure to droplets: Optimal patient-endoscopist distance and use of a barrier device.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Minimizing endoscopist exposure to bodily fluids is important for reducing the risk of infection transmission. This study investigated the patient-endoscopist vertical distance necessary to minimize an endoscopist's facial exposure to a patient's visible droplets during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and the ability of a new device to prevent droplets from reaching the endoscopist's face. METHODS: A model was developed to simulate a patient experiencing a forceful cough during an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with a model endoscopist. Fluorescent dye was expelled from the model patient's mouth towards the model endoscopist during simulated coughs; dye adhesion to the model endoscopist's face was evaluated using ultraviolet light. The simulation was repeated with the model patient positioned 70-100 cm above the floor, with and without a barrier to shield the patient's face. The accuracy of the cough simulation model and the relationship between patient-endoscopist vertical distance and endoscopist's facial exposure were evaluated. RESULTS: The flow dynamics of the cough simulation model were similar to that of an actual human cough. There was a significant inverse correlation between the patient-endoscopist vertical distance and the model endoscopist's facial exposure, with positive exposures decreasing from 87% at 70 cm to 0% at 100 cm (P < 0.001). The barrier device prevented facial exposure to droplets at all distances. CONCLUSIONS: We found that positioning the patient at least 100 cm below the top of the endoscopist's head or using a barrier device minimized the endoscopist's facial exposure to visible droplets during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Effects of Enhanced Personal Protective Equipment.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Personal protective equipment (PPE) decreases the risk of disease contagion, and because of the COVID-19 pandemic, enhanced PPE (EPPE) is widely used during endoscopic procedures including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of EPPE on ERCP success parameters compared to standard PPE (SPPE). METHODS: ERCP procedures were evaluated retrospectively and ERCP outcomes were compared for similar time periods as before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Primary outcomes were cannulation time, number of cannulation attempts, cannulation success rate, difficult cannulation rate, undesired pancreatic duct cannulation rate, ERCP-related adverse events, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Three hundred and eighty ERCP procedures were examined. One hundred and fifty-nine procedures were excluded due to missing data, previous sphincterotomy or altered anatomy. Of the final eligible sample size of 221 ERCPs, 93 were performed using SPPE and 128 were performed under EPPE. Indications of ERCP and demographic parameters were similar between groups. The majority of the ERCP cases included were for benign biliary obstruction of common bile duct stones (88.7%). No significant differences were detected in overall technical success (91.4% vs 92.2%, p = 0.832), cannulation success rates (94.6% vs 96.8%, p = 0.403), cannulation times (median times of both groups were 3 min, p = 0.824), difficult cannulation rates (37.6% vs 33.6%, p = 0.523), undesired pancreatic duct cannulation rates (29% vs 22.7%, p = 0.593), number of cannulation attempts (2.80 vs 2.71, p = 0.731), ERCP-related adverse events (9.7% vs 10.9%, p = 0.762), and length of hospital stay (6.63 vs 6.92 days, p = 0.768) between SPPE and EPPE groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Biliary obstructions of common bile duct stones were the major indication of ERCP in the current study. The use of EPPE had no negative effects on ERCP performance in this patient group. ERCP can be effectively performed under EPPE.

Barrier Devices, Intubation, and Aerosol Mitigation Strategies: Personal Protective Equipment in the Time of Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Numerous barrier devices have recently been developed and rapidly deployed worldwide in an effort to protect health care workers (HCWs) from exposure to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during high-risk procedures. However, only a few studies have examined their impact on the dispersion of droplets and aerosols, which are both thought to be significant contributors to the spread of COVID-19. METHODS: Two commonly used barrier devices, an intubation box and a clear plastic intubation sheet, were evaluated using a physiologically accurate cough simulator. Aerosols were modeled using a commercially available fog machine, and droplets were modeled with fluorescein dye. Both particles were propelled by the cough simulator in a simulated intubation environment. Data were captured by high-speed flash photography, and aerosol and droplet dispersion were assessed qualitatively with and without a barrier in place. RESULTS: Droplet contamination after a simulated cough was seemingly contained by both barrier devices. Simulated aerosol escaped the barriers and flowed toward the head of the bed. During barrier removal, simulated aerosol trapped underneath was released and propelled toward the HCW at the head of the bed. Usage of the intubation sheet concentrated droplets onto a smaller area. If no barrier was used, positioning the patient in slight reverse Trendelenburg directed aerosols away from the HCW located at the head of the bed. CONCLUSIONS: Our observations imply that intubation boxes and sheets may reduce HCW exposure to droplets, but they both may merely redirect aerosolized particles, potentially resulting in increased exposure to aerosols in certain circumstances. Aerosols may remain within the barrier device after a cough, and manipulation of the box may release them. Patients should be positioned to facilitate intubation, but slight reverse Trendelenburg may direct infectious aerosols away from the HCW. Novel barrier devices should be used with caution, and further validation studies are necessary.

Pituitary surgery during Covid-19: a first hand experience and evaluation.

PURPOSE: During the Covid-19 pandemic every hospital has had to change its internal organization. Different institutions have highlighted the risks connected with endoscopic endonasal surgery. The goal of this paper is to illustrate the feasibility of pituitary region surgery during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. METHODS: After two negative Covid tests were obtained, three patients with macro GH-secreting tumors, and two patients with micro ACTH-secreting tumors resistant to medical treatment underwent surgery during the pandemic. During the surgery, every patient was treated as if they were positive. RESULTS: Neither operator, nor patient have developed Covid symptoms. The two neurosurgeons performing the operations underwent two Covid swab, which resulted negative. CONCLUSIONS: Pituitary surgery is a high risk non-urgent surgery. However, the method described has so far been effective and is safe for both patients and healthcare providers.

Investigation of adverse reactions in healthcare personnel working in Level 3 barrier protection PPE to treat COVID-19.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The aim of our study was to investigate potential adverse reactions in healthcare professionals working in Level 3 barrier protection personal protective equipment (L3PPE) to treat patients with COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: By using a convenience sampling approach, 129 out of 205 randomly selected healthcare professionals from the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine were invited to take part in a WeChat messaging app survey, Questionnaire Star, via a survey link. Healthcare personnel details were collected, including profession, years of professional experience and adverse reactions while wearing L3PPE. Survey results were divided by profession and years of professional experience; differences in adverse reactions were compared. RESULTS: Among the 129 healthcare professionals surveyed, 21 (16.28%) were doctors and 108 (83.72%) were nurses. A total of 122 (94.57%) healthcare professionals experienced discomfort while wearing L3PPE to treat patients with COVID-19. The main reasons for adverse reactions and discomfort include varying degrees of adverse skin reactions, respiratory difficulties, heat stress, dizziness and nausea. Doctors had a lower incidence of rashes (χ2=4.519, p=0.034) and dizziness (χ2=4.123, p=0.042) when compared with nurses. Junior (8.5 years of experience or fewer) healthcare personnel also experienced a higher rate of heat stress when compared with senior personnel (more than 8.5 years greater) (χ2=5.228, p=0.022). CONCLUSION: More attention should be offered to healthcare personnel wearing L3PPE to treat patients with COVID-19 because they are susceptible to developing adverse reactions.

ESSD Commentary on Dysphagia Management During COVID Pandemia.

Since the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 pandemic a Global Public Health Emergency, experts in swallowing are seeking guidance on service delivery and clinical procedures. The European Society for Swallowing Disorders provides considerations to support experts in swallowing disorders in clinical practice. During the COVID-19 pandemic, assessment and treatment of patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia should be provided, while at the same time balancing risk of oropharyngeal complications with that of infection of patients and healthcare professionals involved in their management. Elective, non-urgent assessment may be temporarily postponed and patients are triaged to decide whether dysphagia assessment is necessary; instrumental assessment of swallowing is performed only if processing of the instruments can be guaranteed and clinical assessment has not provided enough diagnostic information for treatment prescription. Assessment and management of oropharyngeal dysphagia is a high-risk situation as it must be considered an aerosol-generating procedure. Personal protective equipment (PPE) should be used. Telepractice is encouraged and compensatory treatments are recommended.

The FEES box: A novel barrier to contain particles during aerosol-generating procedures.

PURPOSE: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) such as flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) have been deemed high-risk and in some cases restricted, indicating the need for additional personal protective equipment. The aim of this study was to erect and study a protective barrier for FEES. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A PVC cube was constructed to fit over a patient while allowing for upright endoscopy. A plastic drape was fitted over the cube, and the protective barrier was subsequently named the "FEES Box." Three different particulate-generating tasks were carried out: sneezing, coughing, and spraying water from an atomizer bottle. Each task was completed within and without the FEES Box, and particulate was measured with a particle counter. The average particles/L detected during the three tasks, and baseline measurements, were statistically compared. RESULTS: Without the FEES Box in place, the sneezing and spraying tasks resulted in a statistically significant increase in particles above baseline (p < 0.001 and p = 0.004, respectively); coughing particulate never reached levels significantly higher than baseline (p = 0.230). With use of the FEES Box, there was no statistically significant increase in particles above baseline in any of the three tasks. CONCLUSION: The FEES Box effectively contained particles generated during sneezes and an atomizer spray. It would also likely mitigate coughing particulate, but coughing did not generate a significant increase in particles above baseline. Further research is warranted to test the efficacy of the FEES Box in containing particulate matter during a complete FEES procedure.

Aerosol generating procedures in trauma and orthopaedics in the era of the Covid-19 pandemic; What do we know?

PURPOSE: COVID-19 pandemic has created havoc all over the globe and spared no one regardless of status, gender, location and ethnicity. There were questions raised if trauma and orthopaedic (T&O) procedures actually generated aerosols? The need for a review of literature highlighting the nature and impact of aerosol generation within T&O surgery was noted. METHODS: A comprehensive online search was performed for all published articles in the English language, evaluating AGPs in T&O surgery and the relevant personal protection equipment used. RESULTS: The search strategy populated 43 studies. Six studies were identified as duplicates. The shortlisted 37 studies were screened and nine studies were included in the review. An additional four studies were included from the bibliography review. CONCLUSION: Most orthopaedic procedures are high-risk aerosol generating procedures (AGPs). Conventional surgical masks do not offer protection against high-risk AGPs. In the current era of COVID-19 pandemic, there is a significant risk to the transmission of infection to the theatre staff. For protection against airborne transmission, appropriate masks should be used. These need proper fitting and sizing to ensure full protection when used.

Mitigation of in-hospital risk of coronavirus disease 2019: Experience from a haematology-oncology and stem cell transplant setting.

Background: . Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) was first described in December 2019 and has evolved into an ongoing global pandemic. Cancer patients on chemotherapy are immunocompromised and are at the highest risk of Covid-19-related complications. We describe our experience with the management of haematology-oncology and stem cell transplant (SCT) patients receiving curative chemotherapy in a hospital with a high influx of Covid-19 patients. Methods: . We did a prospective observational study at a 99-bedded cancer centre of a tertiary care teaching hospital from April 2020 to September 2020. Preventive measures taken were categorized as follows: (i) staff: screening, mandatory use of personal protective equipment (PPE), risk stratification of potential exposure and testing and isolation as needed; (ii) patients: mandatory viral polymerase chain reaction testing, segregation of positive and untested patients and testing of family members; and (iii) environment: mandatory regular cleaning, visitor restriction, telemedicine services and reassignment of priority to clinic visits. Treatment of the underlying conditions was continued with added precautions. Results: . A total of 54 patients were included in the analysis, including 48 with haematological malignancies and 6 for stem cell therapy. Preventive measures were universally applied, and chemotherapy with a curative intent was initiated as per protocol. Three patients were detected to have Covid-19 infection before admission and one after the institution of chemotherapy. Nine patients died after the first cycle of chemotherapy, 2 due to severe Covid-19-related illness and 7 due to complications of chemotherapy or disease progression. Conclusions: . In the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic, treatment for haematological malignancies must continue while balancing the risk of Covid-19 infections. Our report emphasizes the effectiveness of measures such as hand hygiene, social isolation, patient segregation, use of masks and PPE and universal pre-treatment testing for Covid-19 in reducing the risk of infection in a high-risk clinical setting.

Effect of COVID-19 on delivery plans and postnatal depression scores of pregnant women.

INTRODUCTION: Owing to the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak Hong Kong hospitals have suspended visiting periods and made mask wearing mandatory. In obstetrics, companionship during childbirth has been suspended and prenatal exercises, antenatal talks, hospital tours, and postnatal classes have been cancelled. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effects of these restrictive measures on delivery plans and risks of postpartum depression. METHODS: We compared pregnancy data and the Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS) scores of women who delivered between the pre-alert period (1 Jan 2019 to 4 Jan 2020) and post-alert period (5 Jan 2020 to 30 Apr 2020) in a tertiary university public hospital in Hong Kong. Screening for postpartum depression was performed routinely using the EPDS questionnaire 1 day and within 1 week after delivery. RESULTS: There was a 13.1% reduction in the number of deliveries between 1 January and 30 April from 1144 in 2019 to 994 in 2020. The EPDS scores were available for 4357 out of 4531 deliveries (96.2%). A significantly higher proportion of women had EPDS scores of ≥10 1 day after delivery in the post-alert group than the pre-alert group (14.4% vs 11.9%; P<0.05). More women used pethidine (6.2% vs 4.6%) and fewer used a birthing ball (8.5% vs 12.4%) for pain relief during labour in the post-alert group. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women reported more depressive symptoms in the postpartum period following the alert announcement regarding coronavirus infection in Hong Kong. This was coupled with a drop in the delivery rate at our public hospital. Suspension of childbirth companionship might have altered the methods of intrapartum pain relief and the overall pregnancy experience.

Hand Dermatitis among Nurses during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Frequency and Factors.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency of hand dermatitis among nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic and factors affecting its prevalence. METHODS: The research sample consisted of 175 nurses working in state hospitals. Research data were collected via Google survey between September and October 2020. The data were collected using a sociodemographic data collection form, and a self-assessment form was used to determine dermatologic symptoms. RESULTS: The frequency of hand dermatitis among nurses was 70.9%. A statistically significant difference was found between sex, allergy history, and increased frequency of handwashing and the frequency of hand dermatitis. No significant difference in terms of the frequency of hand dermatitis was found between nurses who provided care to patients who were COVID-19 positive versus nurses who provided care to patients who were COVID-19 negative. However, the frequency of washing hands and using hand disinfectants and hand creams was found to have increased significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the prepandemic period. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of hand dermatitis increased among nurses during the pandemic. The increased frequency of handwashing during the pandemic poses a risk for hand dermatitis among nurses, although this should not discourage nurses from appropriate hygiene.

Assessment of the impact and reorganization of interventional pulmonology services at a tertiary care centre during nationwide lockdown for COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID 19 pandemic has brought about a sea change in health care practices across the globe. All specialities have changed their way of working during the pandemic. In this study, we evaluated the impact of COVID-19 on the practice of interventional pulmonology at our centre. All interventional pulmonology procedures done during the three months after implementation of lockdown were evaluated retrospectively for patient demographics, clinical diagnosis, indication for procedure and diagnostic accuracy. The changes in practices, additional human resources requirement, the additional cost per procedure and impact on resident training were also assessed. Procedures done during the month of January 2020 were used as controls for comparison. Twenty-two flexible bronchoscopies (75.8%), four semirigid thoracoscopies (13.7%) and three EBUS-TBNAs (10.3%) were carried out during three month lockdown period as compared to 174 during January 2020. Twenty-three of the procedures were for the diagnostic indication (79%), and six were therapeutic (20.6%). The diagnostic yield in suspected neoplasm was 100% while for suspected infections was 58.3%. The percentage of independent procedures being done by residents reduced from 45.4% to 0%. The workforce required per procedure increased from 0.75 to 4-8, and the additional cost per procedure came out to be 135 USD. To conclude, COVID 19 has impacted the interventional pulmonology services in various ways and brought about a need to reorganize the services, while also thinking of innovative ideas to reduce cost without compromising patient safety.