Skin and eye protection against ultraviolet C from ultraviolet germicidal irradiation devices during the COVID-19 pandemic.

With the COVID-19 pandemic depleting personal protective equipment worldwide, various methods including ultraviolet C (UVC) germicidal irradiation (UVGI) have been implemented to decontaminate N95 filtering facepiece respirators. These devices pose a risk for UVC exposure to the operator with reported adverse effects generally limited to the eyes and skin. Our hospitals are currently using UVC devices for N95 decontamination with a few reported cases of face and neck erythema from exposure. Because sunscreens are designed and tested for UVA and UVB protection only, their effects on blocking UVC are largely unknown. Therefore, our objective was to determine if various sunscreens, UV goggles, and surgical mask face shields minimize UVC exposure from UVGI devices. Our study clearly demonstrated that healthcare workers responsible for the disinfection of PPE using UVGI devices should always at least utilize clear face shields or UV goggles and sunscreen to protect against side effects of UVC exposure.

UVC Germicidal Units: Determination of Dose Received and Parameters to be Considered for N95 Respirator Decontamination and Reuse.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in an international shortage of personal protective equipment including N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs), resulting in many institutions using ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI) technology for N95 FFR decontamination. To ensure proper decontamination, it is crucial to determine the dose received by various parts of the FFR in this process. Recently, our group customized a UVGI unit for N95 decontamination. With experimental and theoretical approach, this manuscript discusses the minimum dose received by various parts of the N95 respirator after one complete decontamination cycle with this UVGI unit. The results demonstrate that all parts of the N95 FFR received at least 1 J cm-2 after one complete decontamination cycle with this unit. As there are a variety of UVGI devices and different types of FFRs, this study provides a model by which UVC dose received by different areas of the FFRs can be accurately assessed to ensure proper decontamination for the safety of healthcare providers.

Ultraviolet-C and other methods of decontamination of filtering facepiece N-95 respirators during the COVID-19 pandemic.

During global health emergencies such as the current COVID-19 pandemic, the decontamination of single-use personal protective equipment (PPE) becomes a necessary means to keep up with the growing demand from healthcare workers and patients alike. Many unverified methods are being considered, which can pose the risk of incomplete decontamination and lead to catastrophic results. Several factors come into play when determining the suitability of such methods including the quality of the decontamination technique, the targeted pathogen, cost, ease of installation and use, rate of sterilization, and the surface or material to be sterilized. The germicidal properties of ultraviolet-C are well known. This review will cover the most commonly described methods for the sterilization of N95 respirators, namely, ultraviolet germicidal irradiation, hydrogen peroxide vaporization, microwave-generated steaming, and dry heating. These techniques have been tested previously and have demonstrated efficacy in reducing or inactivating viral and bacterial pathogens, although testing against SARS-CoV-2 specifically has not been done. Moreover, it must be emphasized that proper disposal after a single use is still ideal under normal circumstances.

Ertapenem - a potent treatment for clinical and quality of life improvement in patients with hidradenitis suppurativa.

BACKGROUND: A paucity of knowledge exists regarding the use of ertapenem in hidradenitis suppurativa. Our retrospective chart review and telephone interview aims to investigate the utility of intravenous ertapenem in severe, refractory hidradenitis suppurativa. METHODS: This retrospective chart review and telephone interview included patients with severe, refractory hidradenitis suppurativa treated with intravenous ertapenem between March 2013 and December 2016. Data were obtained from medical charts. During the telephone interview, patients were asked questions relating to satisfaction, quality of life changes, and disease state changes with ertapenem therapy. RESULTS: A total of 36 patients including 22 females and 14 males with Hurley stage II or III hidradenitis suppurativa were included. Thirty-five patients (97.2%), demonstrated improvements in hidradenitis suppurativa with ertapenem treatment. In total, 28 patients participated in our telephone interview. Twenty patients (71.4%) were very satisfied (n = 12) or satisfied (n = 8). Quality of life improved in 85.7% of patients (n = 24). CONCLUSION: Following ertapenem therapy, patients reported improvements in quality of life. This treatment appears promising as an adjunct to biologics or as a bridge to surgery in the treatment of severe, refractory hidradenitis suppurativa.