Fit testing and comfort evaluation of prophylactic dressing use for healthcare workers under N95/P2 respirators in one health service district in Australia.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the use of prophylactic dressings (silicone foam, silicone tape, hydrocolloid) under N95/P2 respirators to determine which dressings fit successfully. AIM: The aim was to develop a health service protocol for one state in Australia. METHODS: Data were collected during August and September 2021 as part of the Respiratory Protection Programme on 600 health workers using three types of prophylactic dressings. Five different types of respirators were used. Participant healthcare workers rated comfort on a four-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Successful fit was achieved by 63.6% of the respirator-dressing combinations. The best-performing respirator-dressing combination was the Trident® respirator with dressing Mepilex® Lite silicone foam (90.2% pass rate). High pass rates were found in the Trident® respirator with Mepilex® Border Lite with SofSicure silicone tape (79.1%); the 3M™ 1860 respirator with Mepilex® Border Lite with SofSicure silicone tape (74%); and the BSN orange duckbill respirator with Mepilex® Lite silicone foam (69.8%). The poorest-performing combination was the BYD™ respirator with Mepilex® Border Lite with SofSicure silicone tape (25.9% pass rate). Uncorrected chi-squared tests for association revealed significant associations between dressing type and outcome (P=0.004) and respirator type and outcome (P<0.001). Most respondents (82%) found the dressing combination markedly comfortable. CONCLUSIONS: When using prophylactic dressings under N95/P2 respirators, it is necessary to perform a fit test. In this study Trident® respirators had the highest probability of successful fit, while BYD™ respirators had the lowest. Combining Trident® respirators with Mepilex® Lite dressing was optimal. Most participants reported greater comfort with the dressings under the respirators.

Towards an international language for incontinence-associated dermatitis (IAD): design and evaluation of psychometric properties of the Ghent Global IAD Categorization Tool (GLOBIAD) in 30 countries.

BACKGROUND: Incontinence-associated dermatitis (IAD) is a specific type of irritant contact dermatitis with different severity levels. An internationally accepted instrument to assess the severity of IAD in adults, with established diagnostic accuracy, agreement and reliability, is needed to support clinical practice and research. OBJECTIVES: To design the Ghent Global IAD Categorization Tool (GLOBIAD) and evaluate its psychometric properties. METHODS: The design was based on expert consultation using a three-round Delphi procedure with 34 experts from 13 countries. The instrument was tested using IAD photographs, which reflected different severity levels, in a sample of 823 healthcare professionals from 30 countries. Measures for diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity), agreement, interrater reliability (multirater Fleiss kappa) and intrarater reliability (Cohen's kappa) were assessed. RESULTS: The GLOBIAD consists of two categories based on the presence of persistent redness (category 1) and skin loss (category 2), both of which are subdivided based on the presence of clinical signs of infection. The agreement for differentiating between category 1 and category 2 was 0·86 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0·86-0·87], with a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 84%. The overall agreement was 0·55 (95% CI 0·55-0·56). The Fleiss kappa for differentiating between category 1 and category 2 was 0·65 (95% CI 0·65-0·65). The overall Fleiss kappa was 0·41 (95% CI 0·41-0·41). The Cohen's kappa for differentiating between category 1 and category 2 was 0·76 (95% CI 0·75-0·77). The overall Cohen's kappa was 0·61 (95% CI 0·59-0·62). CONCLUSIONS: The development of the GLOBIAD is a major step towards a better systematic assessment of IAD in clinical practice and research worldwide. However, further validation is needed.

Exploring pressures, tissue reperfusion and body positioning: a pilot evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship in healthy adults and critically ill patients between: patient position, body mass index (BMI), patient body temperature, interface pressure (IP) and tissue reperfusion (TR). Also to determine the relationship in critically ill patients between: Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, Braden Scale score for predicting pressure injury risk, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) severity of disease classification score, IP and TR. METHODS: This study took place in a 27-bed intensive care unit (ICU) of an Australian tertiary hospital. IP and TR outcomes were measured at the sacrum and greater trochanter. Repeated measures analyses of variance (ANOVAs) and doubly multivariate repeated measures ANOVAs were conducted using peak pressure index (PPI), peak time (PT), settled time constant (STC) and normalised hyperaemic area (NHA) measures of TR as outcomes. Participant type, body mass index (BMI), Braden and APACHE II scores and patient body temperature were considered as between-groups factors and covariates. RESULTS: We recruited 23 low- and high-acuity ICU patients and nine healthy adult volunteers. Not all IP readings could be obtained from ICU patients. TR readings were collected from all recruited patients, but not all TR measurements were mutually uncorrelated. Controlling for age, PPI readings differed between participant types (p=0.093), with the highest values associated with high-acuity patients and the lowest with healthy adults; the association was not substantive when controlling for age and BMI. Age was a significant variable (p=0.008), with older participants having higher scores than younger ones. No statistically significant associations between any measured parameter and TR variables were observed. However, temperature was revealed to be related to TR (p=0.091). CONCLUSIONS: Although not powered to detect significant effects, this pilot analysis has determined several associations of importance, with differences in outcomes observed between low- and high-acuity ICU patients; and between ICU patients and healthy volunteers.