Personal Protective Equipment Associated Symptoms amongst Frontline Health Care Workers in COVID-19 Pandemic � A Cross Sectional Study

Context : During COVID-19 Pandemic, frontline Health Care Worker (HCW) in hospitals were mandated to Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), while caring for suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients, which involved the donning of close-fitting N95 Face Masks, Protective Eyewear, Gowns, Surgical Gloves and the use of Powered AirPurifying Respirators (PAPR). Aims : This study is to know the challenges faced during use of PPE among frontline HCW. Methods and Material : This is a cross-sectional study among HCW at our Tertiary Institution who were working in high-risk hospital areas during COVID-19. All respondents completed a self-administered questionnaire Statistical analysis used : Data were entered in Microsoft Excel and analyzed using SPSS version 23. Baseline characteristics were described using frequency and percentages. Association between predictors of PPE associated symptoms were assessed using Chi-square test with p-value of <0.05 considered as significant. Results : Total of 190 Health Care Workers participated in the study. Doctors- contributed most [143/189 (75.2%)]. Majority of the respondents reported usage of Masks, Eyewear, Shield and Gown [126/189 (66.7%)], in which most of them donned N-95 mask [152/189(80.5%)], and Goggles [110/189 (58.2%)] average for 6.32 (2.40) hours a day and 18.15(8.65) days in a month. 83 respondents reported a new onset headache associated with usage of PPE. Majority of the respondents localized Headaches as frontal (69.9%) which was statistically significant. Other symptoms were Tiredness (73.5%), Excess Sweating (45.4%) and Giddiness (20.6%). Conclusions : Prevalence and characteristics of PPE- associated symptoms in HCW working in high-risk areas in Tertiary Care Centers necessitates better measures and strategies for designing PPE and reducing the exposure time in HCW and also the impact on their work performance

The handling of safety concerns among anaesthetists when restarting full surgical lists during the COVID-19 pandemic

@#Around June 2020, many institutions restarted full operating schedules to clear the backlog of postponed surgeries because of the first wave in the COVID-19 pandemic. In an online survey distributed among anaesthestists in Asian countries at that time, most of them described their safety concerns and recommendations related to the supply of personal protective equipment and its usage. The second concern was related to pre-operative screening for all elective surgical cases and its related issues. The new norm in practice was found to be non-standardized and involved untested devices or workflow that have since been phased out with growing evidence. Subsequent months after reinstating full elective surgeries tested the ability of many hospitals in handling the workload of non-COVID surgical cases together with rising COVID-19 positive cases in the second and third waves when stay-at-home orders eased.

COVID-19, Various Treatment Options and Special Considerations for Dentistry

Objective:The aim of this article is to analyze the epidemiology of COVID-19, comparison of routes of transmission in children and adults, comparing the clinical symptoms in adults and children, treatment protocol to be followed and possible treatment options duringthis pandemic. Data Sources:Data is collected from Pubmed, Medline and Embase databases. Discussion from Previous References Used: Few studies have been done to analyze its effect on children comparing the symptoms of adults and children. Also very lesswork is done to analyze the special precautions taken while doing dental treatment during this pandemic. Conclusion:The widespread effect of Coronavirus (COVID-19) or SARS-CoV-2 has created health concerns in the world. Although efforts have been taken to control the disease, it is still increasing due to the community spread. Health professionals may get patients in their practice with this infection and should prevent its spread.Clinical Significance of this Article:It will help us to differentiate the specific clinical symptoms of adult and pediatric patients coming to dental clinics and the special considerations for them including the emergency dental treatment during COVID-19

Biossegurança laboratorial na pandemia do SARS-CoV-2 / Laboratory biosafety in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

Devido à emergência do SARS-CoV-2, os laboratórios necessitaram se adequar na mes-ma velocidade em que a pandemia se instalou para atender com segurança à crescentedemanda pelos testes diagnósticos. Com o alto potencial de disseminação do vírus, o contato com pacientes e o manuseio laboratorial das amostras tornou-se um desafio sem precedentes para os laboratórios. A necessidade de práticas de biossegurança nunca foi globalmente tão enfatizada como nas circunstâncias atuais da pandemia. O objetivo desta revisão narrativa foi destacar medidas para prevenção da contaminação pelo SARS-CoV-2 nos laboratórios clínicos, utilizando como referência a literatura publicada em livros, artigos científicos, orientações técnicas de autoridades sanitárias e científicas, e na análise crítica e pessoal da autora. Alguns temas abordados foram: compreensão dos riscos, medidas de biossegurança, níveis de biossegurança, barreiras de contenção, uso correto dos equipamentos de proteção individual (EPI), desinfecção das áreas de laboratório, descarte seguro de resíduos, e biossegurança nas fases pré-analítica e analítica. As orientações são baseadas em evidências limitadas e frequentemente fracas, oriundas de opiniões, estudos observacionais ou extrapolações de epidemias anteriores causadas por outros coronavírus. As boas práticas de biossegurança destacadas foram estabelecidas muito antes do surgimento da COVID-19. No entanto, a pandemia trouxe à tona, aos profissionais de laboratório e à população em geral, boas práticas que estavam esquecidas, como a higienização das mãos, a etiqueta respiratória e a forma correta de paramentação e desparamentação dos EPI. Na pandemia, os laboratórios com poucos recursos necessitaram adaptar soluções seguras e econômicas para garantir a segurança laboral.

Due to the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 the laboratories had to adapt, as quickly as the pandemic was installed, to safely meet the growing demand for the diagnostic tests. The high potential for virus spread, contact with patients and laboratory handling of samples has become an unprecedented challenge for laboratories. The need for biosafety practices has never been more globally emphasized as in the current circumstances of the pandemic. The purpose of this narrative review was to highlight strategies to prevent contamination by SARS-CoV-2 in clinical laboratories, using as reference the literature published in books, scientific articles, technical guides from health and scientific authorities, and the critical and personal analysis of the author. Some topics that were covered: understanding risks, biosafety strategies, biosafety levels, containment barriers, correct use of personal protective equipment (PPE), disinfection of laboratory areas, safe disposal of waste, and biosafety in the pre-analytical and analytical phases.The orientations are based on limited and often weak evidence arising from opinions, observational studies or extrapolations from the previous epidemics coronaviruses. The highlighted good practices on biosafety were established long before the emergence of COVID-19. However, the pandemic brought up to the laboratory professionals and population in general, good practices that had been forgotten, such as hands hygiene, respiratory etiquette and the correct way of donning and doffing PPE. In the pandemic, laboratories with limited resources had to adapt safe and economical solutions to ensure safety in the clinical laboratory.

Reducing the consumption of personal protective equipment by setting up a multifunctional sampling station in the emergency department to screen for COVID-19 infection in Taiwan

In Taiwan, high-risk patients have been identified and tested for preventing community spread of COVID-19. Most sample collection was performed in emergency departments (EDs). Traditional sample collection requires substantial personal protective equipment (PPE), healthcare professionals, sanitation workers, and isolation space. To solve this problem, we established a multifunctional sample collection station (MSCS) for COVID-19 testing in front of our ED. The station is composed of a thick and clear acrylic board (2 cm), which completely separates the patient and medical personnel. Three pairs of gloves (length, 45 cm) are attached and fixed on the outside wall of the MSCS. The gloves are used to conduct sampling of throat/nasal swabs, sputum, and blood from patients. The gap between the board and the building is only 0.2 cm (sealed with silicone sealant). ED personnel communicate with patients using a small two-way broadcast system. Medical waste is put in specific trashcans installed in the table outside the MSCS. With full physical protection, the personnel conducting the sampling procedure need to wear only their N95 mask and gloves. After we activated the station, our PPE, sampling time, and sanitization resources were considerably conserved during the 4-week observation period. The MSCS obviously saved time and PPE. It elevated the efficiency and capacity of the ED for handling potential community infections of COVID-19.

Knowledge and practice of medical students of the usage of personal protective equipment: A comparison of two cohorts of students at the International Medical University

Introduction: Standard precautions in health care is the essence of medical practice encompassing the safety of patients and health care workers including medical students. Barriers to the proper use of personal protective equipment (PPE) exist across the world but identification of areas of weaknesses and appropriate remedies will reduce them. This study assesses knowledge and use of PPE among fourth year students after a period of educational interventions. Objective: To evaluate appropriate use, awareness and knowledge about PPE among fourth year students after interventions. Method: A cross- sectional study where forty year 4 students (Group B) were randomly observed and later asked to answer a questionnaire. Students had undergone interventions to improve PPE use, which included lectures and video sessions during each posting. Results were compared with a previous group (Group A). Chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test was used to analyse the data. Results: There was statistically significant improvement in the use of PPE like wearing and removing mask during invasive procedures (p < 0.001) and hand-washing before and after a non- invasive task (p < 0.001) . Comparison of Groups A and B on the results of the questionnaire for ‘Questions in which more than 10% students answered incorrectly’, showed that there was improvement in Group B in all the questions, some being statistically significant with p value=0.01. Conclusion: An overall improvement in the use of the PPE and knowledge was noted. Sometimes, students’ attitude and personality may be a challenge and these students may defy changes, but this can be overcome if the strategies are embedded in the curriculum and taught from as early as the first semester