The Efficacy of an Extraoral Suction Apparatus on Reduction of Splatter Contamination during Impacted Lower Third Molar Surgical Procedure: An Observational Study.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the delivery of dental care globally. Air contamination during aerosol and splatter-generating procedures is of great concern to dental healthcare provider during these times. Extra oral suction (EOS) apparatus has been shown to be effective in preventing infection by control of aerosol. But very limited data is available regarding the efficacy of the apparatus in preventing splatter contamination. Objectives of the Study: To assess the efficacy of EOS apparatus in reducing frequency and mean intensity of splatter contamination at clinician, assistant, patient sites during lower third molar surgical procedures. Materials and Methods: Patients who required surgical removal of an impacted lower third molar were divided into two groups (EOS and non-EOS) with 20 patients each. Universal indicating paper (UIP) was placed in specific locations on the surgeon, patient, and assistant. Colour changes after the settling of splatter on the UIP were analyzed to calculate the percentage intensity of splatter contamination. Results: The use of an EOS device has shown an overall reduction in the total number of contaminated sites, with a difference of 6.36%. Surgeon, patient, and assistant sites showed reductions of 6.25, 10%, and 1.66%, respectively. The apparatus has showed statistically significant reduction of splatter frequency and intensity at the patient's chest and left shoulder regions respectively, during surgical removal of the impacted 48. Conclusion: The magnitude of splatter contamination during minor dentoalveolar surgical procedures is inevitable. Therefore, to achieve a better working environment, usage of an EOS apparatus is advocated.

Aerosol-generating procedures and associated control/mitigation measures: Position paper from the Canadian Dental Hygienists Association and the American Dental Hygienists' Association.

Background: Since the outbreak of COVID-19, how to reduce the risk of spreading viruses and other microorganisms while performing aerosolgenerating procedures (AGPs) has become a challenging question within the dental and dental hygiene communities. The purpose of this position paper is to summarize the evidence of the effectiveness of various mitigation methods used to reduce the risk of infection transmission during AGPs in dentistry. Methods: The authors searched 6 databases-MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar-for relevant scientific evidence published between January 2012 and December 2022 to answer 6 research questions about the risk of transmission, methods, devices, and personal protective equipment (PPE) used to reduce contact with microbial pathogens and limit the spread of aerosols. Results: A total of 78 studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The literature on the risk of infection transmission including SARS-CoV-2 between dental hygienists and their patients is limited. Although several mouthrinses are effective in reducing bacterial contaminations in aerosols, their effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 is also limited. The combined use of eyewear, masks, and face shields is effective in preventing contamination of the facial and nasal region while performing AGPs. High-volume evacuation with or without an intraoral suction, low-volume evacuation, saliva ejector, and rubber dam (when appropriate) have shown effectiveness in reducing aerosol transmission beyond the generation site. Finally, the appropriate combination of ventilation and filtration in dental operatories is effective in limiting the spread of aerosols. Discussion and Conclusion: Aerosols produced during clinical procedures can pose a risk of infection transmission between dental hygienists and their patients. The implementation of practices supported by available evidence will ensure greater patient and provider safety in oral health settings. More studies in oral health clinical environments would shape future practices and protocols, ultimately to ensure the delivery of safe clinical care.

Contexte: Depuis l'éclosion de la COVID-19, la façon de réduire le risque de propagation de virus et d'autres microorganismes tout en effectuant des interventions générant des aérosols (IGA) est devenue un enjeu complexe au sein des communautés de la médecine dentaire et de l'hygiène dentaire. L'objectif de cet exposé de position est de résumer les données probantes de l'efficacité des diverses méthodes d'atténuation utilisées pour réduire le risque de transmission des infections pendant les IGA en médecine dentaire. Méthodes: Les auteurs ont effectué des recherches dans MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library et Google Scholar pour trouver des preuves scientifiques pertinentes publiées entre janvier 2012 et décembre 2022 afin de répondre à 6 questions de recherche sur le risque de transmission, les méthodes, les dispositifs et l'équipement de protection individuelle (EPI) utilisés pour réduire le contact avec les agents pathogènes microbiens et limiter la propagation des aérosols. Résultats: Au total, 78 études ont satisfait aux critères d'admissibilité. La documentation est limitée en ce qui concerne le risque de transmission des infections, y compris le SRAS-CoV-2, entre les hygiénistes dentaires et leurs patients. Bien que plusieurs rince-bouches soient efficaces pour réduire la contamination bactérienne dans les aérosols, leur efficacité contre le SRAS-CoV-2 est limitée. L'utilisation combinée de lunettes, de masques et d'écrans faciaux est efficace pour prévenir la contamination de la région faciale et nasale lors de l'exécution d'IGA. L'évacuation à volume élevé avec ou sans aspiration intraorale, l'évacuation à faible volume, l'aspirateur de salive et la digue dentaire en caoutchouc (le cas échéant) ont démontré une efficacité à réduire la transmission des aérosols au-delà du site de production. Enfin, la combinaison appropriée de ventilation et de filtration dans les salles de traitement dentaire permet de limiter efficacement la propagation des aérosols. Discussion et conclusion: Les aérosols produits lors des interventions cliniques peuvent présenter un risque de transmission des infections entre les hygiénistes dentaires et leurs patients. La mise en oeuvre de pratiques appuyées par les données probantes disponibles assurera une plus grande sécurité des patients et des prestataires dans les milieux de santé buccodentaire. Un plus grand nombre d'études dans les environnements cliniques de santé buccodentaire permettrait de façonner les pratiques et les protocoles futurs dans le but d'assurer la prestation sécuritaire des soins cliniques.

Aerosol Generating Procedures and Associated Control/Mitigation Measures: A position paper from the Canadian Dental Hygienists Association and the American Dental Hygienists' Association.

Background Since the outbreak of COVID-19, how to reduce the risk of spreading viruses and other microorganisms while performing aerosol generating procedures (AGPs) has become a challenging question within the dental and dental hygiene communities. The purpose of this position paper is to summarize the existing evidence about the effectiveness of various mitigation methods used to reduce the risk of infection transmission during AGPs in dentistry.Methods The authors searched six databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, for relevant scientific evidence published in the last ten years (January 2012 to December 2022) to answer six research questions about the the aspects of risk of transmission, methods, devices, and personal protective equipment (PPE) used to reduce contact with microbial pathogens and limit the spread of aerosols.Results A total of 78 studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria. There was limited literature to indicate the risk of infection transmission of SARS-CoV-2 between dental hygienists and their patients. A number of mouthrinses are effective in reducing bacterial contaminations in aerosols; however, their effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 was limited. The combined use of eyewear, masks, and face shields are effective for the prevention of contamination of the facial and nasal region, while performing AGPs. High volume evacuation with or without an intraoral suction, low volume evacuation, saliva ejector, and rubber dam (when appropriate) have shown effectiveness in reducing aerosol transmission beyond the generation site. Finally, the appropriate combination of ventilation and filtration in dental operatories are effective in limiting the spread of aerosols.Conclusion Aerosols produced during clinical procedures can potentially pose a risk of infection transmission between dental hygienists and their patients. The implementation of practices supported by available evidence are best practices to ensure patient and provider safety in oral health settings. More studies in dental clinical environment would shape future practices and protocols, ultimately to ensure safe clinical care delivery.

Lack of effect of an in-line filter on cardiopulmonary exercise testing variables in healthy subjects.

PURPOSE: Pathogen transmission during cardio-pulmonary exercise testing (CPET) is caused by carrier aerosols generated during respiration. METHODS: Ten healthy volunteers (age range: 34 ± 15; 4 females) were recruited to see if the physiological reactions to ramp-incremental CPET on a cycle ergometer were affected using an in-line filter placed between the mouthpiece and the flow sensor. The tests were in random order with or without an in-line bacterial/viral spirometer filter. The work rate aligned, time interpolated 10 s bin data were compared throughout the exercise period. RESULTS: From rest to peak exercise, filter use increased only minute ventilation ([Formula: see text]E) (Δ[Formula: see text]E = 1.56 ± 0.70 L/min, P < 0.001) and tidal volume (VT) (ΔVT = 0.10 ± 0.11 L, P = 0.014). Over the entire test, the slope of the residuals for [Formula: see text]CO2 was positive (0.035 ± 0.041 (ΔL/L), P = 0.027). During a ramp-incremental CPET in healthy subjects, an in-line filter increased [Formula: see text]E and VT but not metabolic rate. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, using an in-line filter is feasible, does not affect appreciably the physiological variables, and may mitigate risk of aerosol dispersion during CPET.

SIR Flat CAP (Safety In Radiology - Flat-Packed Compact Airborne Precaution): A Low-Cost, Portable, Negative-Pressure Isolation Barrier Shield for Protecting Frontline Healthcare Workers.

Introduction Multiple barrier shields have been described since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Most of these are bulky and designed for use in the main anesthetic or radiology departments. We developed a portable, negative-pressure barrier shield designed specifically for portable ultrasound examinations. A novel supine cough generation model was developed together with a reverse qualitative fit test to simulate real-world aerosol droplet generation and dispersion for evaluating the effectiveness of the barrier shield. We report the technical specifications of this design, named "SIR Flat CAP" from Safety In Radiology - Flat-packed Compact Airborne Precaution, as well as its performance in reducing the spread of droplets and aerosols.  Methods The barrier shield was constructed using 1 mm acrylic panels, clear packing tape, foam double-sided tape, and surgical drapes. Negative pressure was provided via hospital wall suction. A supine cough generation model was developed to simulate cough droplet dispersal. A reverse qualitative fit test was used to assess for airborne transmission of microdroplets. Results The supine cough generation model was able to replicate similar results to previously reported supine human cough generation dispersion. The use of the barrier shield with negative-pressure suction prevented the escape of visible droplets, and no airborne microdroplets were detected by reverse qualitative fit testing from the containment area. Conclusions The barrier shield significantly reduces the escape of visible and airborne droplets from the containment area, providing an additional layer of protection to front-line sonographers.

Four key problems that will need to be addressed during the next pandemic.

In June 2023, the UK began official hearings for its independent investigation into pandemic preparedness. Thus far, the inquiry has been told that planning has been wholly inadequate and that a future outbreak is inevitable. We present here four key problems that contributed to significant morbidity and mortality during the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic over the past 3 years in the UK - and which will contribute to excess morbidity and mortality in the next outbreak. First, there was misunderstanding about what procedures were deemed as aerosol generating. Aerosol transmission has always been a component of respiratory viruses; however, no specific aerosol-generating procedures are required to transmit any respiratory pathogens over long distances. Second, policy-makers were too binary in their answers to the public in terms of questions about severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This meant that, as evidence evolved and different conclusions were drawn, the public lost faith in both the UK Government and science. Third, public health guidance did not take into account that certain groups would be impacted differentially by public health guidelines and instead used a one-size-fits-all approach to non-pharmaceutical interventions. Finally, there was worsening of existing inequalities, especially in ethnic minority groups, that resulted in excessive numbers within certain cohorts becoming infected.

Comparing Aerosol Generation in Human and Animal Tissues During Common Otolaryngology Procedures.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether hamster and human tissues generate similar amounts of aerosolized particles using common otolaryngology surgical techniques. STUDY DESIGN: Quantitative experimental research. STUDY SETTING: University research laboratory. METHODS: Drilling, electrocautery, and coblation were performed on human and hamster tissues. Particle size and concentration were measured during the surgical procedures using a scanning mobility particle sizer and an aerosol particle sizer (SMPS-APS) and GRIMM aerosol particle spectrometer. RESULTS: SMPS-APS and GRIMM measurements detected at least 2-fold increases in aerosol concentrations compared to baseline during all procedures. Procedures performed on human and hamster tissues produced similar trends and order of magnitude of aerosol concentrations. Generally, hamster tissues produced higher aerosol concentrations compared to human tissues, and some of these differences were statistically significant. Mean particle sizes for all procedures were small (<200 nm), although statistically significant differences in particle size were identified between human and hamster tissues during coblation and drilling. CONCLUSION: Aerosol-generating procedures performed on human and hamster tissue produce similar trends in aerosol particle concentrations and sizes, although we observed some differences between the 2 tissue types. Further studies should be performed to understand the clinical significance of these differences.

Management of the Normal and Difficult Pediatric Airway: Unique Challenges in the Time of COVID-19.

Purpose of Review: This review focuses on the challenges faced by acute care healthcare workers in the management of the normal and difficult pediatric airway during the COVID-19 pandemic and how these protocols and practices evolved during the pandemic. The current state of knowledge on timing of surgery and anesthesia is also discussed. Recent Findings: In the early days of the pandemic, information about the SARS-CoV-2 virus and disease process was scarce. Governmental, healthcare, and professional organizations created several guidelines to protect invaluable healthcare workers from the contagious virus while also delivering appropriate care to children with COVID-19. With the emergence of new studies and the deployment of new life-saving COVID-19 vaccines and other therapies, these guidelines evolved. The use of aerosol containment devices such as aerosol boxes and flexible barrier techniques was found to be ineffective in reliably containing virus particles while posing potential harm to both healthcare workers and patients. Also, the definition of aerosol-generating and dispersing medical procedures was vastly broadened. To date, use of appropriate personal protection equipment and COVID-19 vaccination are the most effective ways to protect healthcare workers and safely manage children infected with SARS-CoV-2 who require airway intervention. Summary: Evidence-based public health measures and appropriate personal protective equipment remain the best way to protect both healthcare workers and patients. As the virus and population evolve and COVID-19 vaccines become more widely available, clinicians must be willing to adapt to the emerging evidence of their impact on how safe pediatric perioperative care is delivered.

Aerosol Concentrations During Otolaryngology Procedures in a Negative Pressure Isolation Room.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of a negative pressure room with a high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration system on reducing aerosol exposure in common otolaryngology procedures. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective quantification of aerosol generation. SETTINGS: Tertiary care. METHODS: The particle concentrations were measured at various times during tracheostomy tube changes with tracheostomy suctioning, nasal endoscopy with suctioning, and fiberoptic laryngoscopy (FOL), which included 5 times per procedure in a negative pressure isolation room with a HEPA filter and additional 5 times in a nonpressure-controlled room without a HEPA filter. The particle concentrations were measured from the baseline, during the procedure, and continued until 30 minutes after the procedure ended. The particle concentrations were compared to the baseline concentrations. RESULTS: The particle concentration significantly increased from the baseline during tracheostomy tube changes (mean difference [MD] 0.80 × 106 p/m3 , p = .01), tracheostomy suctioning (MD 0.78 × 106 p/m3 , p = .004), at 2 minutes (MD 1.29 × 106 p/m3 , p = .01), and 3 minutes (MD 1.3 × 106 p/m3 , p = .004) after suctioning. There were no significant differences in the mean particle concentrations among various time points during nasal endoscopy with suctioning and FOL neither in isolation nor nonpressure-controlled rooms. CONCLUSION: A negative pressure isolation room with a HEPA filter was revealed to be safe for medical personnel inside and outside the room. Tracheostomy tube change with tracheostomy suctioning required an isolation room because this procedure generated aerosol, while nasal endoscopy with suctioning and FOL did not. Aerosol generated in an isolation room was diminished to the baseline after 4 minutes.

Tracheostomy insertion in COVID-19: insertion practice and factors leading to unplanned tube exchange.

Background: Tracheostomy insertion in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presents unique challenges. Patients frequently have high ventilatory requirements, and as an aerosol generating procedure, tracheostomy insertion creates the potential for staff transmission. Problems with tracheostomies contribute to morbidity and mortality, and tracheostomy changes may increase risks of staff transmission. We sought to quantify the incidence of clinically necessitated tracheostomy changes, establish the indications for change and investigate the incidence of staff transmission. Methods: We conducted a single institution, retrospective, observational cohort study of all intensive care unit (ICU) patients with COVID-19 who had a tracheostomy between March 2020 and April 2021. The institution is a large tertiary referral centre in Ireland. Results: Forty-three patients had a tracheostomy during the study period. All were a Shiley™ Flexible Adult Taperguard or Shiley™ XLT Tracheostomy. 14 patients (33%) required a tracheostomy change, with the majority (57%) involving a change from a standard size to an extended length tracheostomy. Persistent leak was the most common indication for change (71.6%). Other indications included patient-ventilator dyssynchrony, persistent cough and accidental decannulation. No staff transmission of COVID-19 occurred during this study. Conclusions: The incidence of tracheostomy change was 33%, highlighting the importance of selecting the right tracheostomy for each patient. We discuss how key characteristics of tracheostomies such as type, size, length and inner diameter may impact flow, resistance and work of breathing, leading to unplanned tracheostomy change. No staff transmission occurred arising from tracheostomy insertion, adding to increasing evidence that tracheostomy insertion in COVID-19 appears safe with adherence to guidelines describing the correct use of personal protective equipment.

Practices During Intubation in COVID-19 Intensive Care Units in India: A Cross-Sectional Questionnaire-Based Survey.

Background Healthcare workers are committed to learning from each other's experience to safely optimize patient management of COVID-19. Acute hypoxemic failure is common in COVID-19 patients, and nearly 3.2% may require intubation. Intubation is an aerosol-generating procedure (AGP) that might predispose the performer to COVID-19 infection. This survey was intended to evaluate the practices during tracheal intubation in COVID-19 intensive care units (ICUs) and analyze them against the recommendations of the All India Difficult Airway Association (AIDAA) for safe practice. Methodology It was a web-based, multicentric cross-sectional survey. The choices in the questions were based on guidelines for airway management in COVID-19. Survey questions were divided into two parts - the first part consisted of demographics and general information, and the second part focused on safe intubation practices. Results A total of 230 responses were obtained from physicians all over India, presuming their active involvement in COVID-19 cases, of which 226 responses were taken into account. Two-thirds of responders did not receive any training before ICU posting. The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) guideline was followed by 89% of responders for personal protective equipment use. Intubation in COVID-19 patients was predominantly conducted by a senior anesthesiologist/intensivist in the team and a senior resident (37.2%). Rapid sequence intubation (RSI) and modified RSI were preferable among the responder's hospitals (46.5% vs. 33.6%). In most centers, responders used direct laryngoscope for intubation (62.8%), whereas video laryngoscope was used by 34%. Most responders confirmed the endotracheal tube (ETT) position by visual inspection (66.3%) over end-tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO2) concentration tracing (53.9%). Conclusions Safe intubation practices were followed in most of the centers across India. However, teaching and training, preoxygenation methods, alternative ventilation strategies, and confirmation of intubation pertinent to COVID-19 airway management need more attention.

Exhaled patient derived aerosol dispersion during awake tracheal intubation with concurrent high flow nasal therapy.

Awake Tracheal Intubation (ATI) can be performed in cases where there is potential for difficult airway management. It is considered an aerosol generating procedure and is a source of concern to healthcare workers due to the risk of transmission of airborne viral infections, such as SARS-CoV-2. At present, there is a lack of data on the quantities, size distributions and spread of aerosol particles generated during such procedures. This was a volunteer observational study which took place in an operating room of a university teaching hospital. Optical particle sizers were used to provide real time aerosol characterisation during a simulated ATI performed with concurrent high-flow nasal oxygen therapy. The particle sizers were positioned at locations that represented the different locations of clinical staff in an operating room during an ATI. The greatest concentration of patient derived aerosol particles was within 0.5-1.0 m of the subject and along their midline, 2242 #/cm3. As the distance, both radial and longitudinal, from the subject increased, the concentration decreased towards ambient levels, 36.9 ± 5.1 #/cm3. Patient derived aerosol particles < 5 µm in diameter remained entrained in the exhaled aerosol plume and fell to the floor or onto the subject. Patient derived particles > 5 µm in diameter broke away from the exhaled plume and spread radially throughout the operating room. Irrespective of distance and ventilation status, full airborne protective equipment should be worn by all staff when ATI is being performed on patients with suspected viral respiratory infections.

Exposure to airborne SARS-CoV-2 in four hospital wards and ICUs of Cyprus. A detailed study accounting for day-to-day operations and aerosol generating procedures.

In any infectious disease, understanding the modes of transmission is key to selecting effective public health measures. In the case of COVID-19 spread, the strictness of the imposed measures outlined the lack of understanding on how SARS-CoV-2 transmits, particularly via airborne pathways. With the aim to characterize the transmission dynamics of airborne SARS-CoV-2, 165 and 62 air and environmental samples, respectively, were collected in four COVID-19 wards and ICUs in Cyprus and analyzed by RT-PCR. An alternative method for SARS-CoV-2 detection in air that provides comparable results but is less cumbersome and time demanding, is also proposed. Considering that all clinics employed 14 regenerations per hour of full fresh air inside patient rooms, it was hypothesized that the viral levels and the frequency of positive samples would be minimum outside of the rooms. However, it is shown that leaving the door opened in patient rooms hinders the efficiency of the ventilation system applied, allowing the virus to escape. As a result, the highest observed viral levels (135 copies m-3) were observed in the corridor of a ward and the frequency of positive samples in the same area was comparable to that inside a two-bed cohort. SARS-CoV-2 in that corridor was found primarily to lie in the coarse mode, at sizes between 1.8 and 10 µm. Similar to previous studies, the frequency of positive samples and viral levels were the lowest inside intensive care units. However, if a patient with sufficient viral load (Ct-value 31) underwent aerosol generating procedures, positive samples with viral levels below 45 copies m-3 were acquired within a 2 m distance of the patient. Our results suggest that a robust ventilation system can prevent unnecessary exposure to SARS-CoV-2 but with limitations related to foot traffic or the operations taking place at the time.

Reduction in cycle time for a rapid polymerase chain reaction diagnostic test at the point of care.

Background: Rapid testing facilitates safe and effective diagnosis, but the true speed of the process is the time from collection of a sample to delivery of an accurate and reliable test result - 'end-to-end' time. Transport, unpacking and relaying of information can extend this time considerably beyond the minimum laboratory turnaround times as stipulated by PCR testing protocols. Aim/Objective: This study aimed to minimise time needed to ascertain SARS-CoV-2 status prior to treatment in a UK Dental Hospital using a novel, mobile, direct to polymerase chain reaction (PCR) workflow. Methods: Process flow analysis and PDSA (Plan, Do, Study, Act) cycles for rapid continuous improvement were employed in a service improvement programme. Primerdesign™ q16 rapid PCR instruments and PROmate® COVID-19 direct assays were used for molecular testing. Findings/Results: We showed a reduction in real-world end-to-end time for a diagnostic test from 240 min to 85 min (65% reduction) over a 4-week period. Discussion: New rapid technologies have become available that reduce analytical time to under 90 min, but the real-world clinical implementation of the test requires a fully integrated workflow from clinic to reporting.

Dental team member compliance with personal protective equipment and aerosol-generating procedure recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic in Israel: An observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Coronaviruses which have been responsible for numerous epidemics worldwide, share common transmission modalities and pose a risk within dental clinics. Updated, COVID-19-specific infection control and personal protective equipment (PPE) guidelines for dental settings, including minimizing aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs), were issued by the Israeli Ministry of Health (MoH) in spring 2020. This study investigated dental team members (dentists, dental assistants and hygienists) compliance with MoH recommendations exposed to asymptomatic COVID-19 positive patients. METHODS: The MoH analysed exposure reports from dental clinics to asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 positive patients following their reopening (April 2020). Exposure reports were verified against a COVID-19 national database. A cumulative transmission rate was calculated and compared to the rate in the population. RESULTS: One thousand three hundred twenty-third exposure reports were received (May 1-December 31, 2020) regarding dental team members who treated asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 positive patients: 525 (39.7%) were dentists, 656 (49.6%) dental assistants and 126 (9.5%) hygienists. Practitioner type was not reported in 16 (1.2%) cases. Most dental team members reported full PPE use and performance of short/non-aerosol-generating procedures. Dentists and hygienists reported higher compliance compared with dental assistants. 8 (0.6%) dental team members (four dentists, four dental assistants) were positive post-exposure, with an average of 5.4 days (median 5 days, SD = 4.8) from dental treatment to a positive COVID-19 test. PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS: Most dental team members complied fully with the MoH recommendations. Differences were found between the dental team members (hygienists being most adherent). Further efforts are required to encourage full compliance.

A Multimodal Approach to Training Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Processes Across Four Intensive Care Units.

Background: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) required innovative training strategies for emergent aerosol generating procedures in intensive care units. This manuscript summarizes institutional operationalization of COVID-specific training, standardized across four intensive care units. Methods & Results: An interdisciplinary team collaborated with the Simulator Program and OpenPediatrics refining logistics using process maps, walkthroughs and simulation. A multimodal approach to information dissemination, high-volume team training in modified resuscitation practices and technical skill acquisition included instructional videos, training superusers, small-group simulation using a flipped classroom approach with rapid cycle deliberate practice, interactive webinars, and cognitive aids. Institutional data on application of this model are presented. Conclusion: Success was founded in interdisciplinary collaboration, resource availability and institutional buy in.

Environmental Contamination by SARS-CoV-2 During Noninvasive Ventilation in COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Environmental contamination by SARS-CoV-2 from patients with COVID-19 undergoing noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in the ICU is still under investigation. This study set out to investigate the presence of SARS-CoV-2 on surfaces near subjects receiving NIV in the ICU under controlled conditions (ie, use of dual-limb circuits, filters, adequate room ventilation). METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, observational study in the ICU of a tertiary teaching hospital. Four surface sampling areas, at increasing distance from subject's face, were identified; and each one was sampled at fixed intervals: 6, 12, and 24 h. The presence of SARS-CoV-2 was detected with real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) test on environmental swabs; the RT-PCR assay targeted the SARS-CoV-2 virus nucleocapsid N1 and N2 genes and the human RNase P gene as internal control. RESULTS: In a total of 256 collected samples, none were positive for SARS-CoV-2 genetic material, whereas 21 samples (8.2%) tested positive for RNase P, thus demonstrating the presence of genetic material unrelated to SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that application of NIV in an appropriate environment and with correct precautions leads to no sign of surface environmental contamination. Accordingly, our data support the idea that use of NIV in the ICU is safe both for health care workers and for other patients.

Pharmacologic methods to minimise coughing during extubation in the era of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Given the current severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic, coughing at the time of extubation is at risk of creating aerosolisation. This may place health care workers at risk of nosocomial infection during the perioperative period. This study aims to summarise the current pharmacologic methods to minimise cough at the time of extubation, and to determine whether some strategies could be more beneficial than others. METHODS: This is a summary of systematic reviews. A comprehensive search through MEDLINE was performed. Thirty-three publications were screened for eligibility. Only the manuscripts discussing pharmacologic methods to minimise coughing on extubation were included in this review. FINDINGS: Many pharmacological agents have been proposed to decrease the incidence of cough at the time of extubation. Of these, intravenous administration of dexmedetomidine (relative risk 0.4; 95% CI: 0.4-0.5) or remifentanil (RR 0.4; 95% CI: 0.4-0.5) seems to have the largest effect to reduce cough on extubation. CONCLUSION: The available data in the current literature is sparse. Yet, dexmedetomidine and remifentanil seem to be the most efficient agents to decrease the incidence of emergence coughing.

The Laboratory Characterization of Fugitive Aerosol Emissions From a Standard Jet Nebulizer With and Without a Filtered Mouthpiece.

Background and objective The risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission from patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during nebulization is unclear. In this study, we aimed to address this issue. Methods Fugitive emissions of aerosolized saline during nebulization were observed using a standard jet nebulizer fitted with unfiltered and filtered mouthpieces connected via a mannequin to a breathing simulator. Fugitive emissions were observed by using a laser sheet and captured on high-definition video, and they were measured by using optical particle counters positioned where a potential caregiver may be administering nebulization and three other locations in the sagittal plane at various distances downstream of the mannequin. Results The use of a standard unfiltered mouthpiece resulted in significant emission of fugitive aerosols ahead of and above the mannequin (spread over 2 m in front). A mouthpiece with a filter-adaptor effectively suppressed the emissions, with only minor leakage from the nebulizer cup. Particle count measurements supported the visual observations, providing total particle count levels and aerosol concentration levels at the measurement locations. The levels decayed slowly with downstream distance. Conclusions The visualization described above captured the dispersion of emitted aerosols in the plane of the laser sheet, aligned with the sagittal plane. The particle count measurements provided temporal and spatial distributions of the aerosol concentration levels over the time and locations considered. However, the exhaled air and aerosolized droplets spread three-dimensionally in front of and above the mannequin. The results visually highlight the effectiveness of using a filtered mouthpiece in suppressing the fugitive aerosols and identify an approach for limiting the occupational exposure of healthcare workers to these emissions while administering nebulized therapies.

Aerosol-generating procedures, how best did anesthesiologists use available personal protective equipment during early COVID-19 pandemic in a tertiary care center of southern India? A prospective cross-sectional study.

Background and Aims: Anesthesiologists are involved in high-risk procedures for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 like aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs). The present study was conducted to assess the compliance toward the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) and proposed modifications in anesthesia techniques to prevent dissemination of the virus among healthcare workers. Material and Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study was conducted during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and included all elective surgeries involving AGPs inside operation theatres and remote areas. Participants were anesthesia consultants and trainees. Trained anesthesia technicians observed and documented all the AGPs and data entry with analysis was done using EPI Data 3.1, SPSS 21.0. Descriptive statistics were reported using mean ± SD for continuous variables. Results: Preoperative COVID-19 test was done in 96.3% of patients. Most (74.8%) of the AGPs were performed by consultants. In our study, compliance for N95 masks usage and hand hygiene was found to be 99.2% and 55.9%, respectively. Avoidance of crowding was followed in only 38.9% during intubation. To contain the aerosol-based spread of virus, modification of anesthesia practices like acrylic boxes (6.4%), plastic sheets (5.5%), video laryngoscopy (39%), rapid sequence intubation (RSI) (42.7%), and 59.3% of deep extubation were incorporated. Conclusion: In our study, we found satisfactory compliance toward usage of N95 masks alone, whereas compliance toward other available PPE and modification in anesthesia practice was found to be unsatisfactory.