Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 4.517
Filter
1.
Rev. Odontol. Araçatuba (Online) ; 43(3): 24-32, set.-dez. 2022. tab
Article in Portuguese | LILACS, BBO - Dentistry | ID: biblio-1381063

ABSTRACT

O objetivo do presente estudo foi identificar quais EPIs foram utilizados pelos cirurgiões-dentistas e a relação destes EPIs com a presença de dores osteomusculares em virtude do novo estilo de vida profissional ocasionado pelo SARS-CoV-2. Foram aplicados dois questionários com a temática por intermédio da plataforma Google Forms®. Os participantes da pesquisa (n= 110) tiveram acesso aos questionários via e-mail e através das redes sociais. A análise de dados foi realizada por meio de teste qui-quadrado com nível de confiança de 95%. Os resultados obtidos demonstraram predomínio de indivíduos do sexo masculino, com idade entre 21 a 29 anos, solteiros, entre 1 a 10 anos de formado, possuindo renda mensal de 1 a 5 salários-mínimos, especialistas, atuando em consultório particular, com atualizações para atendimento durante o período de pandemia. Observou-se relação estatisticamente significativa (p<0,05) na utilização de gorro durante os atendimentos odontológicos para os profissionais que realizaram atualizações para atendimento durante o período de pandemia da COVID-19. Em relação aos demais EPIs não houve relação estatisticamente significativa (p>0,05). No que diz respeito às dores osteomusculares, observou-se relação estatisticamente significativa (p<0,05) apenas entre a utilização de avental descartável e o relato de dores na região do pescoço, ombro e costas. Ademais, não foi possível observar relação estatisticamente significativa (p>0,05) entre EPIs e dores osteomusculares. Pôde-se concluir que uma grande parcela dos cirurgiões-dentistas adotou medidas de proteção contra o novo Coronavírus (SARS-CoV-2), utilizando os EPIs recomendados para executar atendimento durante o período pandêmico. Com relação às dores osteomusculares, os participantes relataram dor com ou sem a utilização de EPIs, porém ao utilizarem avental descartável, houve predominância de sintomatologia na região do pescoço, ombros e coluna(AU)


The aim of this study was to identify which PPE was used by Dental Surgeons and the relationship of this PPE with the presence of musculoskeletal pain due to the new professional lifestyle caused by SARS-CoV-2. Two questionnaires with the theme were applied through the Google Forms® platform. Research participants (n = 110) had access to the questionnaires via e-mail and through social networks. Data analysis was performed using a chi-square test with a 95% confidence level. The results showed a predominance of male individuals, aged between 21 and 29 years old, single, between 1 and 10 years since graduation, having a monthly income of 1 to 5 minimum wages, specialists, working in private practice, with updates for care during the pandemic period. There was a statistically significant relationship (p<0.05) in the use of a cap during dental care for professionals who updated for care during the COVID-19 pandemic period. About the other PPE there was no statistically significant relationship (p>0.05). Regarding musculoskeletal pain, there was a statistically significant relationship (p<0.05) only between the use of a disposable apron and the report of pain in the neck, shoulder, and back. Furthermore, it was not possible to observe a statistically significant relationship (p>0.05) between PPE and musculoskeletal pain. It was concluded that a large portion of dentists adopted protective measures against the new Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), using the recommended PPE to perform care during the pandemic period. Regarding musculoskeletal pain, participants reported pain with or without the use of PPE, however, when using a disposable apron, there was a predominance of symptoms in the neck, shoulders, and back(AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Dentists , Musculoskeletal Pain , Personal Protective Equipment , COVID-19 , Shoulder , Occupational Risks , Occupational Health , SARS-CoV-2 , Ergonomics
2.
F1000Res ; 11: 413, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35903420

ABSTRACT

Background: This study was done to describe the pattern of personal protective equipment (PPE) use, associated factors, and adverse events among obstetricians and obstetric nurses in obstetrics & gynecology departments.  Methods: A cross sectional study was conducted in Obstetrics & Gynecology departments in three hospitals (physician & nurses n=252) using an online Google form including demographic and occupational health data, type of available personal protective equipment during usual care, CS and emergency labor, infection control measures and hazards of full PPE use. Results Full PPE use was 37.7% during CS and 34.9% during emergency labor. The significant predictors of wearing full PPE during CS were daily work hours > 8 hours and receiving formal training about PPE use. During CS & emergency labor most of HCws used sterile gloves and sterile fluid resistant gowns and surgical mask.to less extent used face shields or tight fitting googles and one tenth (11.8%) only used N95. The most common health effects of full PPE use was sense of heat (79.5%) . Conclusion: During the COVID-19 pandemic more vigorous respiratory (N95 mask) and eye protection is required during aerosol-generating procedures. Formal training is an evident predictor for full PPE use.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Physicians , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Egypt , Female , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment , Pregnancy , Respiratory Aerosols and Droplets , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Am J Disaster Med ; 17(1): 49-56, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35913183

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Military firefighters are the first responders in the event of a chemical, biological, radiation, and nuclear (CBRN) event in the Marseille area. They receive initial training to intervene safely in a CBRN context. We wanted to evaluate the use of CBRN personal protective equipment (PPE) at a distance from this training. METHOD: A prospective observational bicentric descriptive study on 20 operational firefighters operating on rescue and emergency vehicles. Two PPE dressing sessions, separated by 3 months, were evaluated and timed. A reminder of the correct procedure was given by the investigator after the first dressing. RESULTS: On average, 60.5 percent of the steps were correctly performed during the first dressing and 83 percent during the second dressing. Between the two dressings, there was a significant improvement (p < 0.01) in the team verification of the dressing and the chronological order of the dressing as well as the actions to be taken before dressing (remembering to make oneself comfortable, to urinate, to drink). The second dressing is on average 21 seconds faster than the first. Professional training and exercise experience of the firefighters in CBRN improve the success and speed of dressing in the absence of a prior reminder. CONCLUSION: Shorter and more frequent training and exercises, which simulate real-life situations for firefighters, lead to safer, more competent and faster donning of PPE.


Subject(s)
Firefighters , Military Personnel , Humans , Personal Protective Equipment
4.
Anaesthesia ; 77(9): 959-970, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35864419

ABSTRACT

The evidence base surrounding the transmission risk of 'aerosol-generating procedures' has evolved primarily through quantification of aerosol concentrations during clinical practice. Consequently, infection prevention and control guidelines are undergoing continual reassessment. This mixed-methods study aimed to explore the perceptions of practicing anaesthetists regarding aerosol-generating procedures. An online survey was distributed to the Membership Engagement Group of the Royal College of Anaesthetists during November 2021. The survey included five clinical scenarios to identify the personal approach of respondents to precautions, their hospital's policies and the associated impact on healthcare provision. A purposive sample was selected for interviews to explore the reasoning behind their perceptions and behaviours in greater depth. A total of 333 survey responses were analysed quantitatively. Transcripts from 18 interviews were coded and analysed thematically. The sample was broadly representative of the UK anaesthetic workforce. Most respondents and their hospitals were aware of, supported and adhered to UK guidance. However, there were examples of substantial divergence from these guidelines at both individual and hospital level. For example, 40 (12%) requested respiratory protective equipment and 63 (20%) worked in hospitals that required it to be worn whilst performing tracheal intubation in SARS-CoV-2 negative patients. Additionally, 173 (52%) wore respiratory protective equipment whilst inserting supraglottic airway devices. Regarding the use of respiratory protective equipment and fallow times in the operating theatre: 305 (92%) perceived reduced efficiency; 376 (83%) perceived a negative impact on teamworking; 201 (64%) were worried about environmental impact; and 255 (77%) reported significant problems with communication. However, 269 (63%) felt the negative impacts of respiratory protection equipment were appropriately balanced against the risks of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Attitudes were polarised about the prospect of moving away from using respiratory protective equipment. Participants' perceived risk from COVID-19 correlated with concern regarding stepdown (Spearman's test, R = 0.36, p < 0.001). Attitudes towards aerosol-generating procedures and the need for respiratory protective equipment are evolving and this information can be used to inform strategies to facilitate successful adoption of revised guidelines.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Personal Protective Equipment , Anesthetists , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Respiratory Aerosols and Droplets , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Am J Infect Control ; 50(8): 898-905, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35908829

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Adherence to infection prevention and control (IPC) measures, including the proper use of protective personal equipment (PPE), in health care is complex and is influenced by many factors. Isolated interventions do not have the potential to achieve optimal PPE adherence and appropriate provision, leading to incomplete PPE implementation. OBJECTIVE: To map PPE implementation in health care with a focus on its barriers and facilitators. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted across 14 electronic databases using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. RESULTS: Seventy-four papers were included in the review. Findings were analyzed and synthesized into categories to match the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains. The content was then synthesized into barriers for PPE implementation and interventions to address them. The main barriers were discomfort in clinical work; shortage, supply and logistics problems; inadequacies in facilities infrastructure, weakness in policies and communication procedures; and health workers' (HW) psychological issues and lack of preparedness. Implementation interventions reported were related to HW wellbeing assurance; work reorganization; IPC protocols; adoption of strategies to improve communication and HW training; and adoption of structural and organizational changes to improve PPE adherence. CONCLUSIONS: PPE implementation, which is critical IPC programs, involves multilevel transdisciplinary complexity. It relies on the development of context-driven implementation strategies to inform and harmonize IPC policy in collaboration with local and international health bodies.


Subject(s)
Health Personnel , Personal Protective Equipment , Delivery of Health Care , Health Facilities , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans
6.
Turk J Gastroenterol ; 33(6): 515-519, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35786620

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Given that procedures involving gastrointestinal tract lumens are high-risk and aerosol forming, the functioning of endos- copy units has been reorganized during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Guidelines recommend that all personnel should carry out procedures in a negative-pressure room with personal protective equipment; in the absence of a negative-pressure room, an ade- quately ventilated room should be used. During the normalization of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, this study aimed to evalu- ate children who were treated in our endoscopy unit without a negative-pressure chamber in terms of coronavirus disease 2019 after procedures. METHODS: Patients were questioned and evaluated prospectively for symptoms and contact with coronavirus disease 2019 patients on before and 7th and 14th days after the procedure. RESULTS: Seventy-eight procedures were performed on 69 patients over a 3-month period. The mean age of patients was 12.0 ± 5.1 years. Among all the procedures performed, 54 (69.2%) involved upper gastrointestinal system (GIS) endoscopy and 24 (30.8%) involved colo- noscopy. Furthermore, 72 (91.3%) of the procedures were performed in the pediatric endoscopy unit, and 6 (7.7%) were performed in the operating room. No coronavirus disease 2019 symptoms or presence was detected in the patients. CONCLUSION: The ideal setting for an endoscopic procedure is in a negative-pressure chamber. However, this study has shown that endoscopic procedures can be performed in units without negative-pressure rooms but with appropriate protective equipment and evaluation of patients for coronavirus disease 2019 symptoms.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Adolescent , COVID-19/prevention & control , Child , Colon , Endoscopy , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment
7.
J Adv Res ; 39: 147-156, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35777904

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Face masks are regarded as effective Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the dominant polypropylene (PP)-based masks are devoid of antiviral/antibacterial activities and create enormous environmental burdens after disposal. OBJECTIVES: Here we report a facile and potentially scalable method to fabricate biodegradable, breathable, and biocidal cellulose nonwovens (BCNWs) to address both environmental and hygienic problems of commercially available face masks. METHODS: TEMPO-oxidized cellulose nonwovens are rendered antiviral/antibacterial via covalent bonding with disinfecting polyhexamethylene guanidine or neomycin sulfate through carbodiimide coupling chemistry. RESULTS: The obtained results showed that the BCNWs have virucidal rate of >99.14%, bactericidal efficiency of >99.51%, no leaching-out effect, and excellent air permeability of >1111.5 mm s-1. More importantly, the as-prepared BCNWs can inactivate SARS-CoV-2 instantly. CONCLUSIONS: This strategy provides a new platform for the green fabrication of multifunctional cellulose nonwovens as scalable bio-protective layers with superior performance for various PPE in fighting COVID-19 or future pandemics. Additionally, replacing the non-biodegradable non-antimicrobial PP-based masks with the cellulose-based masks can reduce the plastic wastes and lower the greenhouse gas production from the incineration of disposed masks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Personal Protective Equipment , Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Antiviral Agents , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cellulose , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
8.
ACS Appl Bio Mater ; 5(7): 3405-3417, 2022 Jul 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35776851

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its variants have rapidly spread worldwide, causing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) with numerous infected cases and millions of deaths. Therefore, developing approaches to fight against COVID-19 is currently the most priority goal of the scientific community. As a sustainable solution to stop the spread of the virus, a green dip-coating method is utilized in the current work to prepare antiviral Ag-based coatings to treat cotton and synthetic fabrics, which are the base materials used in personal protective equipment such as gloves and gowns. Characterization results indicate the successful deposition of silver (Ag) and stabilizers on the cotton and polypropylene fiber surface, forming Ag coatings. The deposition of Ag and stabilizers on cotton and etched polypropylene (EPP) fabrics is dissimilar due to fiber surface behavior. The obtained results of biological tests reveal the excellent antibacterial property of treated fabrics with large zones of bacterial inhibition. Importantly, these treated fabrics exhibit an exceptional antiviral activity toward human coronavirus OC43 (hCoV-OC43), whose infection could be eliminated up to 99.8% when it was brought in contact with these fabrics after only a few tens of minutes. Moreover, the biological activity of treated fabrics is well maintained after a long period of up to 40 days of post-treatment.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents , COVID-19 , Humans , Personal Protective Equipment , Polypropylenes , SARS-CoV-2 , Textiles
9.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 22(1): 867, 2022 Jul 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35790970

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Effective use of personal protective equipment (PPE) reduces this risk. We sought to determine the prevalence and predictors of self-reported access to appropriate PPE (aPPE) for HCWs in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted cross sectional analyses using data from a nationwide questionnaire-based cohort study administered between December 2020-February 2021. The outcome was a binary measure of self-reported aPPE (access all of the time vs access most of the time or less frequently) at two timepoints: the first national lockdown in the UK in March 2020 (primary analysis) and at the time of questionnaire response (secondary analysis). RESULTS: Ten thousand five hundred eight HCWs were included in the primary analysis, and 12,252 in the secondary analysis. 35.2% of HCWs reported aPPE at all times in the primary analysis; 83.9% reported aPPE at all times in the secondary analysis. In the primary analysis, after adjustment (for age, sex, ethnicity, migration status, occupation, aerosol generating procedure exposure, work sector and region, working hours, night shift frequency and trust in employing organisation), older HCWs and those working in Intensive Care Units were more likely to report aPPE at all times. Asian HCWs (aOR:0.77, 95%CI 0.67-0.89 [vs White]), those in allied health professional and dental roles (vs those in medical roles), and those who saw a higher number of COVID-19 patients compared to those who saw none (≥ 21 patients/week 0.74, 0.61-0.90) were less likely to report aPPE at all times. Those who trusted their employing organisation to deal with concerns about unsafe clinical practice, compared to those who did not, were twice as likely to report aPPE at all times. Significant predictors were largely unchanged in the secondary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Only a third of HCWs in the UK reported aPPE at all times during the first lockdown and that aPPE had improved later in the pandemic. We also identified key determinants of aPPE during the first UK lockdown, which have mostly persisted since lockdown was eased. These findings have important implications for the safe delivery of healthcare during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Personal Protective Equipment , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cohort Studies , Communicable Disease Control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Personnel , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom/epidemiology
10.
Pediatr Ann ; 51(7): e277-e280, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35858214

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had profound effects on the management of pediatric patients with intestinal failure. Limitations in personal protective equipment and other necessary supplies led to changes in home care of central venous catheters. Limitations for in-person clinic visits led to changes in care delivery systems and contributed to delays in care and delays in the progression toward enteral autonomy. The emotional strain of living with chronic illness during a pandemic caused hardships that are still being felt. Delays in surgical care also potentially delayed children weaning from parenteral nutrition. The global pandemic of COVID-19 and its far-reaching effects on society contributed to challenges and changes in the multidisciplinary care of pediatric patients with intestinal failure, of which the full effect is still unknown. [Pediatr Ann. 2022;51(7):e277-e280.].


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Intestinal Failure , Parenteral Nutrition , Child , Humans , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment
11.
J Infect Dev Ctries ; 16(6): 1001-1008, 2022 06 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35797294

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The objective was to analyze the factors associated with use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) among Brazilian physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODOLOGY: An analytical cross-sectional study was conducted from October to December 2020 with 1298 Brazilian physicians. The respondent driven sampling technique was used by sharing the survey through social media. RESULTS: Factors associated with the use of PPE while caring for COVID-19 patients were: being female (AOR = 1.57; 95% CI: 1.24-1.98; p ≤ 0.001); working in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) (AOR = 2.78; 95% CI: 2.06-3.75; p ≤ 0.001); training (AOR = 1.62; 95% CI: 1.25-2.09; p ≤ 0.001); access to sufficient PPE (AOR = 2.22; 95% CI: 1.27-3.90; p = 0.0050), and PPE of good quality (AOR = 1.84; 95% CI: 1.16-2.92; p = 0.009). The following factors were associated with the use of recommended PPE during procedures that generate aerosols in the context of COVID-19: working in the ICU (ORA=2.73; 95% CI: 2.06-3.62; p < 0.01); working in a field hospital (AOR = 1.37; 95% CI: 1.06-1.79; p = 0.018;) training (AOR = 1.72 95% CI: 1.32-2.24; p < 0.01); access to sufficient PPE (AOR = 1.63; 95% CI: 0.91-2.92; p < 0.01), PPE of good quality (AOR = 2.07; 95% CI: 1.28-3.35; p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The factors associated with the use of necessary PPE with COVID-19 patients and for procedures that generate aerosols were identified. Educational interventions for professionals and managers must be implemented to direct them towards protecting themselves and others.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Physicians , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Male , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment
12.
J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent ; 40(2): 165-170, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35859409

ABSTRACT

Background: Managing anxiety in children during the pandemic will be a concern for many pediatric dentists. Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the anxiety levels in children aged between 4 and 9 years about the pediatric dentists donning a personal protective equipment (PPE) for dental treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic era in Bengaluru. Methods: The study was done in two parts with a sample size of 100 each. The first part was a questionnaire-based survey addressed to the pediatric dentists practicing in Bengaluru. The second part of the study was clinical assessment of dental anxiety at three time intervals (T1, T2, and T3) using the animated emoji scale. Results: The study revealed that 87% use preprocedural behavior management post-COVID. Majority of the dentists donned the PPE before conditioning the child (59%) and 41% wore the PPE after conditioning the child. The mean anxiety level in the study children showed an increase in anxiety level at T2 of 3.58 (P < 0.001 ± 1.32) in children aged 4-6 years when compared to T1 and T3 of 3.27 (P < 0.001 ± 1.64) and 3.07 (P < 0.001 ± 1.32), respectively. Conclusion: Children aged between 4 and 6 years showed increased levels of anxiety compared to the 7-9-year age group to the pediatric dentists donning a PPE during treatment in the COVID-19 pandemic. Pediatric dentists also showed a satisfactory knowledge regarding disinfection and fumigation procedures.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Personal Protective Equipment , Anxiety/prevention & control , COVID-19/prevention & control , Child , Child, Preschool , Dentists , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
13.
Niger J Clin Pract ; 25(7): 1014-1020, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35859459

ABSTRACT

Background: Nurses were affected by this pandemic more than any other healthcare professionals because they were working on the frontline continuously. Aims: The current study explored how nurses who care for patients with COVID-19 assess this process which they experienced, how they coped with the process, and their psychological experiences. The study was conducted by reaching out to the nurses working at pandemic clinics using the snowball sampling method. A total of 40 nurses were interviewed using telephone. The study employed a descriptive qualitative approach. The data were obtained through telephonic interviews that were performed by the researcher using interview forms. Materials and Methods: The interview notes were analyzed using the content analysis method according to Colaizzi's phenomenological method. Results: As a result of the content analysis, four themes emerged with the following headings: Initial reactions, factors that made an adaptation to the period of pandemic challenging, factors that facilitated the adaptation, and what the period of pandemic taught. Conclusions: It is suggested for nurses that their rotation should be planned effectively, and their social support should be enhanced. They should be provided with adequate personal protective equipment and human resource planning should be improved until the end of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Nurses , Nursing Staff, Hospital , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Nursing Staff, Hospital/psychology , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment
15.
Med Sci Monit ; 28: e936844, 2022 Jul 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35778812

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND During the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, personal protective equipment (PPE) is used during medical resuscitation aerosol-generating procedures (AGP). This simulation study aimed to evaluate the effects of PPE on the performance of emergency resuscitation by medical students from the University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland and non-medical personnel, and used a quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (Q-CPR) medical manikin. MATERIAL AND METHODS A simulation study was conducted using the Resusci Anne quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (Q-CPR) medical manikin (Laerdal Medical AS, Norway). Participants were divided into 2 groups: a medical group of 50 and a non-medical group of 52, matched in pairs. Each pair performed 10 min of manual CPR with a compression-ventilation ratio of 30: 2 wearing PPE for AGP. The reference method was manual CPR wearing casual clothes along with surgical masks and latex gloves. Data about compression and ventilation were gathered using the QCPR Training application from Laerdal Medical. RESULTS Data analyses indicated statistically significant differences between medical students using PPE for AGP and basic protection: average rate of chest compressions (123 vs 114 per min; P=0.004), chest recoil (69 vs 93; P=0.0050, correct depth of chest compressions (86.5 vs 97; P=0.0081), quality of ventilation (85 vs 89; P=0.0041). Among non-medical personnel however, a statistically significant difference was in the quality of ventilation (69-85.5; P=0.0032). CONCLUSIONS The findings from this study showed that the use of PPE for AGP during CPR was associated with slower average speed of chest compressions, less chest recoil, incorrect depth of chest compressions, and lower quality of ventilation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Students, Medical , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/methods , Humans , Manikins , Personal Protective Equipment , Poland
16.
Rev Esc Enferm USP ; 56: e20210579, 2022.
Article in English, Portuguese | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35899926

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To map the technical and managerial strategies for the management and reduction of airborne particles production in surgical procedures settings during the Covid-19 pandemic. METHOD: Scoping review, according to the Joana Briggs Institute methodology, based on documents indexed in MEDLINE, VHL, CINAHL Cochrane, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and gray literature, published in Portuguese, English, or Spanish. All studies from indexed scientific journals and recommendations published by international agencies or academic associations from 2019 to January 2022 were considered. Findings were summarized and analyzed using descriptive statistics and narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were selected, 19 of which were published in English, two in Spanish, one in Portuguese, with a predominance of literature reviews. Findings were categorized into recommendations for the environment, the team, and the surgical technique. CONCLUSION: The review mapped the technical and managerial strategies for the management and reduction of the airborne particles production in surgical procedures settings. They involve from the use of personal protective equipment, training, anesthetic modality, airway manipulation, to the execution of the surgical technique.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment
18.
J Int Adv Otol ; 18(4): 347-357, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35894532

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To assess compliance with guidance produced by the UK body representing all ENT Surgeons (ENT UK) and the British Society of Otology (BSO) on restarting otological surgery after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Safety was assessed by recording surgical complica- tions and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 transmission during this period. METHODS: A prospective multicenter audit of otological surgery was conducted over a 12-week period, from June 15, 2020, to September 6, 2020. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred thirty cases from 79 hospital sites across Great Britain were involved in the study; 91.1% were tested for SARS-CoV-2 pre-operatively, none of whom tested positive; 70.4% were isolated for 7-14 days prior to surgery; 28.2% of surgeons wore full personal protective equipment, compared with 66.6% of anesthetists and 68.2% of scrub staff. The endoscope was used in 75 (6.7%) of all proce- dures, operations were changed to be performed under local rather than a general anesthetic in 3 cases (0.3%) and the "double drape" to protect against aerosol was used in 321 (27.4%) of cases. Trainees were present in 80.3% of cases. Complications occurred in 4% of cases. No patients or staff contracted SARS-CoV-2 during the audit. CONCLUSION: ENT UK and BSO guidance was variably followed, with the highest compliance for the use of an FFP3 mask, a negative SARS-CoV-2 swab, and trainee presence in theater. Surgeons did not use full personal protective equipment as frequently as their anesthetic and scrub team colleagues. There were only minimal changes in surgical and anesthetic techniques. Otological operation after the first wave of the SARS- CoV-2 pandemic was performed safely with no reported COVID transmission or increase in major complications despite changes in operating practice.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Otolaryngology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment , SARS-CoV-2
20.
Am J Infect Control ; 50(8): 878-884, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35908826

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Face shields were widely used in 2020-2021 as facial personal protective equipment (PPE). Laboratory evidence about how protective face shields might be and whether real world user priorities and usage habits conflicted with best practice for maximum possible protection was lacking - especially in limited resource settings. METHODS: Relative protective potential of 13 face shield designs were tested in a controlled laboratory setting. Community and health care workers were surveyed in middle income country cities (Brazil and Nigeria) about their preferences and perspectives on face shields as facial PPE. Priorities about facial PPE held by survey participants were compared with the implications of the laboratory-generated test results. RESULTS: No face shield tested totally eliminated exposure. Head orientation and design features influenced the level of protection. Over 600 individuals were interviewed in Brazil and Nigeria (including 240 health care workers) in March-April 2021. Respondents commented on what influenced their preferred forms of facial PPE, how they tended to clean face shields, and their priorities in choosing a face cover product. Surveyed health care workers commonly bought personal protection equipment for use at work. CONCLUSIONS: All face shields provided some protection but none gave high levels of protection against external droplet contamination. Respondents wanted facial PPE that considered good communication, secure fixture, good visibility, comfort, fashion, and has validated protectiveness.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Personal Protective Equipment , COVID-19/prevention & control , Developing Countries , Health Personnel , Humans , Protective Devices
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...