Adverse skin reactions among health care workers using face personal protective equipment during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey of six hospitals in Denmark.

BACKGROUND: Health care workers (HCWs) report frequent adverse skin reactions (ASRs) due to face personal protective equipment (F-PPE) use during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. OBJECTIVES: To describe self-reported ASRs among HCWs using F-PPE; investigate background factors, such as chronic skin diseases and skin types (dry, oily, combination, sensitive), and determine whether HCWs took preventive methods against ASRs. METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed to 22 993 HCWs at hospitals. RESULTS: The prevalence of ASRs was 61.9% based on 10 287 responders. Different types of F-PPE caused different reactions. The most common ASRs from surgical masks were spots and pimples (37.2%) and from FFP3 masks was red and irritated skin (27.3%). A significantly higher proportion of HCWs with chronic skin diseases had ASRs (71.6%) than those without chronic skin diseases (59.7%) (P < .001). Some skin types were more prone to ASRs (sensitive skin [78.8%] vs dry skin [54.3%]; P = .001). HCWs using F-PPE for >6 hours versus <3 hours per day had a four times higher ASR risk (P = <.001). Nearly all HCWs used preventive and/or counteractive methods (94.2%). CONCLUSIONS: It is important to consider background factors, such as chronic skin diseases and skin types, to prevent and counteract ASRs due to F-PPE use.

Prevalence of skin tears in the extremities in inpatients at a hospital in Denmark.

The aims of the study were to determine the prevalence of skin tears in the extremities and to explore factors associated with development of skin tears in inpatients at a Danish hospital. The study was designed as a point prevalence survey and included 202 patients in the age range 19-99 (mean: 70·7, SD: 16·5). The patients were assessed for presence of skin tears, numbers, locations and previous skin tears. Data were collected using a data collection sheet developed for a previous study. The survey team consisted of four specialist nurses. Data were collected over a period of 24 hours spread over 3 days. Of the 202 patients, 23 had skin tears, yielding a prevalence of 11·4%. In total, 40 skin tears were observed. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that previous skin tears (odds ratio (OR): 9·3, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2·6-33·4, P < 0·001), ecchymosis (OR: 5·6, CI: 1·4-23·2, P < 0·017) and risk of falling (OR: 3·8, CI: 1·2-12·0, P < 0·021) were significantly associated with development of skin tears. The prevalence of skin tears in this study (11·4%) matches other international observations. The following risk factors were recognised: previous skin tear, ecchymosis and risk of falling. These factors could be used to identify patients requiring prevention of skin tears.

Probing community nurses' professional basis: a situational case study in diabetic foot ulcer treatment.

Complicated and long-lasting wound care of diabetic foot ulcers are moving from specialists in wound care at hospitals towards community nurses without specialist diabetic foot ulcer wound care knowledge. The aim of the study is to elucidate community nurses' professional basis for treating diabetic foot ulcers. A situational case study design was adopted in an archetypical Danish community nursing setting. Experience is a crucial component in the community nurses' professional basis for treating diabetic foot ulcers. Peer-to-peer training is the prevailing way to learn about diabetic foot ulcer, however, this contributes to the risk of low evidence-based practice. Finally, a frequent behaviour among the community nurses is to consult colleagues before treating the diabetic foot ulcers.

Assessment of Simple Bedside Wound Characteristics for a Prediction Model for Diabetic Foot Ulcer Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based learning systems built on prediction models can support wound care community nurses (WCCNs) during diabetic foot ulcer care sessions. Several prediction models in the area of diabetic foot ulcer healing have been developed, most built on cardiovascular measurement data. Two other data types are patient information (i.e. sex and hemoglobin A1c) and wound characteristics (i.e. wound area and wound duration); these data relate to the status of the diabetic foot ulcer and are easily accessible for WCCNs. The aim of the study was to assess simple bedside wound characteristics for a prediction model for diabetic foot ulcer outcomes. METHOD: Twenty predictor variables were tested. A pattern prediction model was used to forecast whether a given diabetic foot ulcer would (i) increase in size (or not) or (ii) decrease in size. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) in a receiver-operating characteristics curve were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 162 diabetic foot ulcers were included. In combination, the predictor variables necrosis, wound size, granulation, fibrin, dry skin, and age were most informative, in total an AUC of 0.77. CONCLUSIONS: Wound characteristics have potential to predict wound outcome. Future research should investigate implementation of the prediction model in an evidence-based learning system.

LIMPRINT: Prevalence of Chronic Edema in Health Services in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Background: The International Lymphedema Framework developed an international study, Lymphedema Impact and Prevalence International (LIMPRINT), to estimate the prevalence and impact of chronic edema (CO) in heterogeneous populations. Methods and Results: A validation study using the LIMPRINT methodology was undertaken in Denmark. Participants with CO were identified from inpatient services and compared with those identified within a specialist lymphedema service and three primary care settings. Of 452 inpatients available for screening, CO was present in 177 (39%) and absent in 275 (61%). In addition, 723 participants were found from specialist and primary care services (LPCSs). Inpatients were significantly older and more likely to be underweight or normal weight. They were more likely to suffer from heart failure/ischaemic heart disease (44.6% vs. 23.4%, p < 0.001) and have neurological problems (18.1% vs. 10.9% p = 0.009). Patients in the inpatient group were nearly all suffering from secondary lymphedema and were less likely to have a cancer or venous diagnosis, but more likely to have immobility as the cause of CO (44.0% vs. 17.7%, p < 0.001). No inpatients had midline CO compared with 30 within LPCSs. Fewer in the inpatient group had standard CO treatment (17.1% vs. 73.5%, p < 0.001) and subjective control of swelling was worse (19.9% vs. 66.7%, p < 0.001). While the inpatient group experienced fewer acute infections, when they did so, they were more likely to be admitted to hospital for this (78.6% vs. 51.0%, p = 0.049). Conclusion: The prevalence of CO in inpatient facilities is high and those with CO have multiple comorbidities that vary according to setting. The feasibility study showed that the methodology could be adapted for use in different health systems.

LIMPRINT: Estimation of the Prevalence of Lymphoedema/Chronic Oedema in Acute Hospital in In-Patients.

Background: To estimate the prevalence of lymphedema/chronic edema (CO) and wounds in acute hospital inpatients in five different countries. Methods and Results: A point-prevalence study was carried out during working day periods in six general hospitals in four countries (Denmark, France, United Kingdom, and Australia) and one hospital oncology inpatient unit in one other country (Ireland). The study used validated clinical tools for the assessment and collection of data. Data were collected by expert clinicians through interviews and physical examination of the patients present in the wards. A total of 1905 patients could be included and investigated among the 3041 total bed occupancy in the seven hospitals. Lymphedema/CO was present in 723 of them (38%). Main risk factors associated with CO were age, morbid obesity, and heart failure, as well as chair bound immobility and neurological deficiency. History of cellulitis was frequent in patients with CO and wounds (24.8%) and CO alone (14.1%) compared to the 1.5% prevalence in patients without CO. Conclusion: Lymphedema/CO is very frequent in patients hospitalized in hospital acute wards. It is strongly associated with obesity, venous insufficiency, and heart failure. Our results strongly suggest a hidden health care burden and cost linked to CO independently of chronic wounds.