Global value chains for medical gloves during the COVID‐19 pandemic: Confronting forced labour through public procurement and crisis

This paper evaluates ways in which labour issues in global value chains for medical gloves have been affected by, and addressed through, the COVID‐19 pandemic. It focuses on production in Malaysia and supply to the United Kingdom's National Health Service and draws on a large‐scale survey with workers and interviews with UK government officials, suppliers and buyers. Adopting a Global Value Chain (GVC) framework, the paper shows how forced labour endemic in the sector was exacerbated during the pandemic in the context of increased demand for gloves. Attempts at remediation are shown to operate through both a reconfigured value chain in which power shifted dramatically to the manufacturers and a context where public procurement became higher in profile than ever before. It is argued that the purchasing power of governments must be leveraged in ways that more meaningfully address labour issues, and that this must be part of value chain resilience. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Global Networks is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Healthcare worker protection against epidemic viral respiratory disease.

Lower respiratory infections are often caused or precipitated by viruses and are a leading cause of global morbidity and mortality. Mutations in these viral genomes can produce highly infectious strains that transmit across species and have the potential to initiate epidemic, or pandemic, human viral respiratory disease. Transmission between humans primarily occurs via the airborne route and is accelerated by our increasingly interconnected and globalised society. To this date, there have been four major human viral respiratory outbreaks in the 21st century. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at particular risk during respiratory epidemics or pandemics. This is due to crowded working environments where social distancing, or wearing respiratory personal protective equipment for prolonged periods, might prove difficult, or performing medical procedures that increase exposure to virus-laden aerosols, or bodily fluids. This review aims to summarise the evidence and approaches to occupational risk and protection of HCWs during epidemic or pandemic respiratory viral disease.

Instruments of health and harm: how the procurement of healthcare goods contributes to global health inequality.

Many healthcare goods, such as surgical instruments, textiles and gloves, are manufactured in unregulated factories and sweatshops where, amongst other labour rights violations, workers are subject to considerable occupational health risks. In this paper we undertake an ethical analysis of the supply of sweatshop-produced surgical goods to healthcare providers, with a specific focus on the National Health Service of the United Kingdom. We contend that while labour abuses and occupational health deficiencies are morally unacceptable in the production of any commodity, an additional wrong is incurred when the health of certain populations is secured in ways that endanger the health and well-being of people working and living elsewhere. While some measures have been taken to better regulate the supply chain to healthcare providers in the UK, further action is needed to ensure that surgical goods are sourced from suppliers who protect the labour and occupational health rights of their workers.

ENT from afar: Opportunities for remote patient assessment, clinical management, teaching and learning.

Remote communication in ENT has been expanding, spurred by the COVID-19 pandemic. Conferences and teaching have moved online, enabling easier participation and reducing financial and environmental costs. Online multi-disciplinary meetings have recently been instigated in Africa to discuss management of cases in head and neck cancer, or cochlear implantation, expanding access and enhancing patient care. Remote patient consultation has also seen an explosion, but existing literature suggests some caution, particularly because many patients in ENT need an examination to enable definitive diagnosis. Ongoing experience will help us to better understand how remote communication will fit into our future working lives, and also where face-to-face interaction may still be preferable.

A systematic review of outcomes of remote consultation in ENT.

AIMS: Remote or tele-consultation has become an emerging modality of consultation in many specialities, including ENT. Advantages include increasing accessibility, potential to reduce costs and, during the COVID-19 pandemic, reduced risk of infection transmission. Here, we systematically collate and synthesise the evidence base on outcomes from remote consultation in adult and paediatric ENT services. METHODS: We performed a review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. We searched Medline and Embase for relevant articles. Outcomes include specific patient pathway efficiency measures (including number of healthcare visits, lead time, touch time and handoff), patient/clinician satisfaction, cost analysis and safety implications. RESULTS: From 6325 articles screened, 53 met inclusion criteria. Publications included studies on remote consultation for initial, preoperative and follow-up assessment (including postoperative). In most instances, remote consultation reduced costs and time from referral to assessment and was associated with high patient satisfaction. However, a face-to-face follow-up appointment was required in 13%-72% of initial consultations, suggesting that remote consultation is only appropriate in selected cases. CONCLUSION: Remote consultation is appropriate and preferable for ENT consultation in specific conditions and circumstances. Future research should look to better define those conditions and circumstances, and report using recognised quality standards and outcome measures.

Environmental impact of personal protective equipment distributed for use by health and social care services in England in the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the environmental impact of personal protective equipment (PPE) distributed for use by the health and social care system to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in England, and model strategies for mitigating the environmental impact. DESIGN: Life cycle assessment was used to determine environmental impacts of PPE distributed to health and social care in England during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic. The base scenario assumed all products were single-use and disposed of via clinical waste. Scenario modelling was used to determine the effect of environmental mitigation strategies: (1) eliminating international travel during supply; (2) eliminating glove use; (3) reusing gowns and face shields; and (4) maximal recycling. SETTING: Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, UK. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The carbon footprint of PPE distributed during the study period totalled 106,478 tonnes CO2e, with greatest contributions from gloves, aprons, face shields and Type IIR surgical masks. The estimated damage to human health was 239 DALYs (disability-adjusted life years), impact on ecosystems was 0.47 species.year (loss of local species per year), and impact on resource depletion was costed at US $12.7m (GBP £9.3m). Scenario modelling indicated UK manufacture would have reduced the carbon footprint by 12%, eliminating gloves by 45%, reusing gowns and gloves by 10% and maximal recycling by 35%. RESULTS: A combination of strategies may have reduced the carbon footprint by 75% compared with the base scenario, and saved an estimated 183 DALYS, 0.34 species.year and US $7.4m (GBP £5.4m) due to resource depletion. CONCLUSION: The environmental impact of PPE is large and could be reduced through domestic manufacture, rationalising glove use, using reusables where possible and optimising waste management.