A 7-min video training intervention improves worker short-term radiation safety behavior during small animal diagnostic radiography.

Although manual restraint for small animal diagnostic radiography is common, worker protection is often not optimized, particularly for hands and eyes. Radiation safety training videos generally include hours of material on content other than personal protective equipment (PPE), have limited content, if any, on reducing dose to the lens of the eye, and are presented at the level of veterinary professionals. The objectives of this prospective, observational study were to develop a short, open access video training intervention at the layperson level, focused on proper use of PPE, and to test the effectiveness of the training video in changing behavior of workers. The use of PPE, optimal head position, and body position relative to the source of scattered radiation were compared before and after the video training was completed by workers. Results of unconditional and multivariable analyses were similar. In final multivariable analysis, workers wore gloves correctly more frequently (odds ratio [OR] = 2.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.68-2.59; P < .001) and wore eyewear more frequently (OR = 1.85; 95% CI, 1.23-2.78; P = .003) after completing the training intervention. Workers also had an optimal head position more frequently (OR = 1.27; 95% CI, 1.03-1.58; P = .03) and stood straight or leaned back more frequently (OR = 1.85; 95% CI, 1.48-2.23; P < .001) after completing the training. The video training developed in this study is an effective tool that can be incorporated into a radiation protection program to improve worker radiation safety behaviors during manual restraint for small animal diagnostic radiography.

Nota informativa nº 01 /2020 - DVAST/ DVDVZ /SVS/SES: recomendações aos agentes de combates à endemias-ace para enfrentamento da pandemia de Coronavírus ­ covid-19 (infecção pelo SARS-CoV-2) / Informative note nº 01 / 2020 - DVAST / DVDVZ / SVS / SES: recommendations to agents to combat ace-endemic diseases for coping with the Coronavirus pandemic - covid-19 (SARS-CoV-2 infection)

Traz reflexões e recomendações aos gestores e trabalhadores na discussão coletiva de medidas que minimizem os riscos à saúde dos Agentes de Combates à Endemias-ACE, como também, reduzam a disseminação do COVID-19 para seus familiares e a população em geral. Complementa os informes e protocolos emitidos pela SES-TO e seu Comitê Operacional de Emergências em Saúde e pelo Ministério da Saúde.

It brings reflections and recommendations to managers and workers in the collective discussion of measures that minimize the health risks of Agents to Combat Endemics-ACE, as well as reduce the spread of COVID-19 to their families and the population in general. It complements the reports and protocols issued by SES-TO and its Operational Committee for Health Emergencies and the Ministry of Health.

Aporta reflexiones y recomendaciones a directivos y trabajadores en la discusión colectiva de medidas que minimicen los riesgos para la salud de los Agentes de Lucha contra las Endemias-ACE, así como reduzcan la propagación del COVID-19 a sus familias y a la población en general. Complementa los informes y protocolos emitidos por la SES-TO y su Comité Operativo de Emergencias Sanitarias y el Ministerio de Salud.

Use of personal protective equipment in a radiology room at a veterinary teaching hospital.

The use of personal protective equipment by veterinary workers during radiographic imaging is inconsistent. While the self-reported use of leaded aprons and thyroid shields approaches 100% in some studies, the use of leaded gloves and eyeglasses is much lower. Previous studies describing personal protective equipment use are based on self-reporting. Objectives of this prospective, observational study were to describe use of leaded personal protective equipment during radiographic imaging by veterinary workers, and to compare observed use with self-reported use. Use of leaded personal protective equipment during radiographic imaging by veterinary workers was observed over a 10 week period using two motion-triggered video cameras, and a questionnaire was then completed by workers on their use of personal protective equipment. Workers restrained the animal during 91.8% (753/820) of exposures. An apron and a securely closed thyroid shield were worn for >99% of studies. Gloves were used correctly for 43.6% (156/358) of radiographic studies. Leaded eyeglasses were worn for 1.7% (6/358) of studies. Correct glove use was more frequent during regular working hours than after-hours for both veterinarians (odds ratio 32.7, P = 0.001) and veterinary students (odds ratio 75.1, P < 0.001). The number of workers in the room was lower when animals were sedated (P = 0.002) or anesthetized (P = 0.017). Workers overestimated their frequency of glove use (P <0.001). In conclusion, workers use personal protective equipment less frequently in an unsupervised environment, and overestimate their use of personal protective equipment. Use of sedation or anesthesia decreases worker exposure to ionizing radiation.

Evaluation of biosecurity measures to prevent indirect transmission of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of biosecurity methods to mitigate the transmission of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV) via farm personnel or contaminated fomites is poorly understood. This study was undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness of biosecurity procedures directed at minimizing transmission via personnel following different biosecurity protocols using a controlled experimental setting. RESULTS: PEDV RNA was detected from rectal swabs of experimentally infected (INF) and sentinel pigs by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). Virus shedding in INF pigs peaked at 1 day post infection (dpi) and viral RNA levels remained elevated through 19 dpi. Sentinel pigs in the low biosecurity group (LB) became PEDV positive after the first movement of study personnel from the INF group. However, rectal swabs from pigs in the medium biosecurity (MB) and high biosecurity (HB) groups were negative during the 10 consecutive days of movements and remained negative through 24 days post movement (dpm) when the first trial was terminated. Viral RNA was detected at 1 dpm through 3 dpm from the personal protective equipment (PPE) of LB personnel. In addition, at 1 dpm, 2 hair/face swabs from MB personnel were positive; however, transmission of virus was not detected. All swabs of fomite from the HB study personnel were negative. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that indirect PEDV transmission through contaminated PPE occurs rapidly (within 24 h) under modeled conditions. Biosecurity procedures such as changing PPE, washing exposed skin areas, or taking a shower are recommended for pig production systems and appear to be an effective option for lowering the risk of PEDV transmission between groups of pigs.

Zoonotic disease risk perceptions in the British veterinary profession.

In human and veterinary medicine, reducing the risk of occupationally-acquired infections relies on effective infection prevention and control practices (IPCs). In veterinary medicine, zoonoses present a risk to practitioners, yet little is known about how these risks are understood and how this translates into health protective behaviour. This study aimed to explore risk perceptions within the British veterinary profession and identify motivators and barriers to compliance with IPCs. A cross-sectional study was conducted using veterinary practices registered with the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons. Here we demonstrate that compliance with IPCs is influenced by more than just knowledge and experience, and understanding of risk is complex and multifactorial. Out of 252 respondents, the majority were not concerned about the risk of zoonoses (57.5%); however, a considerable proportion (34.9%) was. Overall, 44.0% of respondents reported contracting a confirmed or suspected zoonoses, most frequently dermatophytosis (58.6%). In veterinary professionals who had previous experience of managing zoonotic cases, time or financial constraints and a concern for adverse animal reactions were not perceived as barriers to use of personal protective equipment (PPE). For those working in large animal practice, the most significant motivator for using PPE was concerns over liability. When assessing responses to a range of different "infection control attitudes", veterinary nurses tended to have a more positive perspective, compared with veterinary surgeons. Our results demonstrate that IPCs are not always adhered to, and factors influencing motivators and barriers to compliance are not simply based on knowledge and experience. Educating veterinary professionals may help improve compliance to a certain extent, however increased knowledge does not necessarily equate to an increase in risk-mitigating behaviour. This highlights that the construction of risk is complex and circumstance-specific and to get a real grasp on compliance with IPCs, this construction needs to be explored in more depth.