Are Contact Precautions ethically justifiable in contemporary hospital care?

Hospital infection control practices known as Contact Precautions are recommended for the management of people with pathogens such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus or vancomycin-resistant Enterococci. Background: The patient is isolated, and staff are required to wear gloves, and a gown or apron when providing care. A notice is displayed to remind staff of these requirements and an 'alert' message is placed in the patient's medical record. Objective: The aim of this article is to discuss and explore whether practices used in hospitals to reduce the transmission of endemic antibiotic-resistant organisms are ethically justified in today's healthcare environment in the developed world. In order to do this, the history of the development of these practices is summarised, and the evidence base for their effectiveness is reviewed. Key bioethics principles are then discussed and contextualised from the perspective of hospital infection prevention and control, and an ethically superior model for the prevention and control of healthcare associated infection is proposed.

Challenges in providing surgical procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic: Qualitative study among Operating Department Practitioners in Pakistan.

The surgical theatre is associated with the highest mortality rates since the onslaught of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, Operating Department Practitioners (ODPs) are neglected human resources for health in regards to both professional development and research for patient safety; even though they are key practitioners with respect to infection control during surgeries. Therefore, this study aims to describe challenges faced by ODPs during the pandemic. The secondary aim is to use empirical evidence to inform the public health sector management about both ODP professional development and improvement in surgical procedures, with a specific focus on pandemics. A qualitative study has been conducted. Data collection was based on an interview guide with open-ended questions. Interviews with 39 ODPs in public sector teaching hospitals of Pakistan who have been working during the COVID-19 pandemic were part of the analysis. Content analysis was used to generate themes. Ten themes related to challenges faced by ODPs in delivering services during the pandemic for securing patient safety were identified: (i) Disparity in training for prevention of COVID-19; (ii) Shortcomings in COVID-19 testing; (iii) Supply shortages of personal protective equipment; (iv) Challenges in maintaining physical distance and prevention protocols; (v) Human resource shortages and role burden; (vi) Problems with hospital administration; (vii) Exclusion and hierarchy; (viii) Teamwork limitations and other communication issues; (ix) Error Management; and (x) Anxiety and fear. The public health sector, in Pakistan and other developing regions, needs to invest in the professional development of ODPs and improve resources and structures for surgical procedures, during pandemics and otherwise.

Management of diabetes in elderly patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: current and future perspectives.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the entire population with the most deleterious effects in elders. Elders, especially those with diabetes, are at the highest risk of COVID-19 related adverse outcomes and mortality. This is usually linked to the comorbidities that accumulate with age, diabetes-related chronic inflammation, and the pandemic's psychosocial effects.Areas covered: We present some approaches to manage these complicated elderly patients with diabetes during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the inpatient setting, we suggest similar (pre-pandemic) glycemic targets and emphasize the importance of using IV insulin and possible use of continuous glucose monitoring to reduce exposure and PPE utilization. Outside the hospital, we recommend optimal glycemic control within the limits imposed by considerations of safety. We also describe the advantages and challenges of using various technological platforms in clinical care.Expert opinion: The COVID-19 pandemic has lifted the veil off serious deficiencies in the infrastructures for care at both the individual level and the population level and also highlighted some of the strengths, all of which affect individuals with diabetes and COVID-19. We anticipate that things will not return to 'normal' after the COVID-19 pandemic has run its course, but rather they will be superseded by 'New Normal.'

Ethical Rationing of Personal Protective Equipment to Minimize Moral Residue During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

This article proposes systems for the fair distribution of scarce resources to healthcare providers. It builds on classic ethical structures and adapts them to the equitable distribution of personal protective equipment (PPE) to clinicians at risk of contracting novel corona virus-19 (COVID-19). The article also defines systems of allocation that are generally considered unethical and are to be avoided. We emphasize that policies must be transparent, collaborative, applied equally, and have a system of accountability. It is recognized that unless the supply of PPE is quickly replenished, or viable alternatives to traditional equipment are devised in the coming days to weeks, hospitals and healthcare systems will face the difficult task of rationing PPE to at-risk clinicians. This paper suggests an ethical framework for that process.

Application of an objective structured clinical examination to evaluate and monitor intern's proficiency of hand hygiene and personal protective equipment use in the United States.

PURPOSE: To determine if an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) could be used to evaluate and monitor hand hygiene and personal protective equipment (PPE) proficiency for medical interns in the United States. METHODS: Interns in July 2015 (N=123, Cohort 1) without OSCE-based contact precaution evaluation and teaching were evaluated early 2016 by OSCE for hand hygiene and PPE proficiency. They performed poorly. Therefore, the new interns entering July 2016 (N=151, Cohort 2) were immediately tested in the same OSCE station as Cohort 1 and provided feedback and teaching. Cohort 2 was then retested in the OSCE station early 2017. The Mann Whitney U test was used to compare Cohort 1 vs. Cohort 2 performances on checklist items. Cohort 2 performance differences at the beginning and end of the intern year were compared using McNemar's X2 test for paired nominal data. RESULTS: Checklist items were scored, summed and reported as percent correct. In Cohort 2, the mean percent correct was higher in posttest than pretest, 92% vs. 77% )(P <0 .0001). The passing rate (100% correct) was significantly higher, 55% vs. 16%. Comparing Cohort 1 and Cohort 2 at the end of intern year, the mean percent correct was higher for Cohort 2 compared to Cohort 1, 95% vs 90% (P < 0.0001). 55% of the Cohort 2 passed (a perfect score) compared to 24% in Cohort 1 (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: An OSCE can be utilized to evaluate and monitor hand hygiene and PPE proficiency for interns in the United States.