Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add filters

Type of study
Language
Year range
1.
Clin Med Insights Case Rep ; 14: 11795476211042459, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1378115

ABSTRACT

While primarily a respiratory disease, COVID-19 can affect several organ systems and has been recently linked to cases of acalculous cholecystitis. We present a previously healthy elderly patient who presented to the emergency department with sepsis and was found to have COVID-19 after initially testing negative on PCR, along with suspected concomitant acalculous gangrenous cholecystitis. The patient passed away before any surgical intervention could be made. This case aims to discuss the potential relationship between acalculous cholecystitis and COVID-19.

2.
Respir Med ; 181: 106381, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1157713

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused huge impact on public health and significantly changed our lifestyle. This is due to the fast airborne oro-nasal transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from the infected individuals. The generation of liquid aerosolized particles occurs when the COVID-19 patients speak, sing, cough, sneeze, or simply breathe. We have developed a novel aerosol barrier mask (ABM) to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and other infectious pathogens. This Aerosol Barrier Mask is designed for preventing SARS-CoV-2 transmission while transporting patients within hospital facilities. This mask can constrain aerosol and droplet particles and trap them in a biofilter, while the patient is normally breathing and administrated with medical oxygen. The system can be characterized as an oxygen delivery and mitigation mask which has no unfiltered exhaled air dispersion. The mask helps to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2, and potentially other infectious respiratory pathogens and protects everyone in general, especially healthcare professionals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/virology , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Equipment Design/methods , Masks , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Aerosols , COVID-19/transmission , Health Personnel , Humans
3.
researchsquare; 2020.
Preprint in English | PREPRINT-RESEARCHSQUARE | ID: ppzbmed-10.21203.rs.3.rs-81198.v1

ABSTRACT

Background: Elastomeric respirators are reusable and reliable protection from infectious aerosol particles such as SARS-CoV-2. There is a lack of safety data for use in sterile fields limiting application to operating room settings where high-risk aerosol generating procedures are performed. We hypothesized an equivalent reduction in sterile field contamination would be achieved using an elastomeric respirator covered by a surgical mask as compared to a standard surgical mask or N95.Methods: Randomized controlled crossover experiment with repeat measurement comparing microbial and aerosol contamination of operating room surfaces for elastomeric respirators, elastomeric respirators covered by a surgical mask, N95, surgical mask, and no mask. 80 experiments were performed by participants with randomized order and balanced crossover to all masking groups (n=16 per masking group). Participants executed droplet and aerosol generating procedures while wearing: (Group 1) elastomeric respirator with mask, (Group 2) elastomeric respirator only, (Group 3) N95, and (Group 4) surgical mask. Positive control was established with the participant unmasked (Group 5). Contamination was measured by microbial growth on settling plates and optical particle counters (0.2+ and 2 um+ particles).Results: There was a reduction in microbial contamination at the sterile field (p<0.001) for all masks (Groups 1-4) compared to unmasked (Group 5). The mean colony forming units (CFU) at the sterile field was 0 CFUs for elastomeric respirator (+/- mask), N95, and surgical mask versus unmasked growing 1.875 CFUs. Compared to the unmasked control, the elastomeric respirator (+/- mask), N95, and surgical masks all resulted in a -0.75 difference in contamination (95% CI -0.91 to -0.48, p < 0.001). No significant difference in contamination between the elastomeric respirator (+/- mask) and a surgical mask was detected. No significant difference in particle counts (0.2 µm+ and 2.0 µm+) between the elastomeric respirator (+/- mask) and a standard surgical mask.Conclusion and Relevance: Elastomeric respirators with or without mitigation are as effective as a surgical mask and N95 for reducing contamination at the sterile field in an operating room. Consideration should be given to expanding the use of elastomeric respirators to operating rooms during high-risk aerosol generating procedures.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL