Reuse of Personal Protective Equipment: Results of a Human Factors Study Using Fluorescence to Identify Self-Contamination During Donning and Doffing.

BACKGROUND: At least 115,000 health and care workers (HCWs) are estimated to have lost their lives to COVID-19, according to the the chief of the World Health Organization (WHO). Personal protective equipment (PPE) is the first line of defense for HCWs against infectious diseases. At the height of the pandemic, PPE supplies became scarce, necessitating reuse, which increased the occupational COVID-19 risks to HCWs. Currently, there are few robust studies addressing PPE reuse and practice variability, leaving HCWs vulnerable to accidental contamination and harm. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess potential HCW contamination during PPE donning, doffing, and reuse. METHODS: The study included 28 active acute care physicians, nurses, and nurse practitioners that evaluated 5 simulated patients with COVID-like symptoms while donning and doffing PPE between each patient encounter. An N95 mask was contaminated with a transparent fluorescent gel applied to the outside of the N95 mask to simulate contamination that might occur during reuse. Participants were evaluated after PPE doffing for each encounter using a black light to assess for face and body contamination. RESULTS: All participants had multiple sites of contamination, predominantly on their head and neck. None of the participants were able to don and doff PPE without contaminating themselves during five consecutive simulation cycles. CONCLUSIONS: The current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention PPE guidelines for donning and doffing fall short in protecting HCWs. They do not adequately protect HCWs from contamination. There is an urgent need for PPE and workflow redesign.

Adaptive change in simulation education: Comparison of effectiveness of a communication skill curriculum on death notification using in person methods versus a digital communication platform.

Background: Mandates to social distance and "shelter in place" during the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the exploration of new academic content delivery methods. Digital communication platforms (DCP; e.g., Zoom) were widely used to facilitate content delivery, yet little is known about DCP's capacity or effectiveness, especially for simulation. Objective: The objective was to compare the experience, outcomes, and resources required to implement a simulation-based communication skill curriculum on death notification to a cohort of learners using in-person versus DCP delivery of the same content. Methods: We used the GRIEV_ING mnemonic to train students in death notification techniques either in person or utilizing a DCP. For all learners, three measures were collected: knowledge, confidence, and performance. Individual learners completed knowledge and confidence assessments pre- and postintervention. All performance assessments were completed by standardized patients (SPs) in real time. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to identify differences in individual and between-group performances. Results: Thirty-four learners participated (N = 34), 22 in person and 12 via DCP. There was a statistically significant improvement in both groups for all three measures: knowledge, confidence, and performance. Between-group comparisons revealed a difference in pretest confidence but no differences between groups in knowledge or performance. More preparation and prior planning were required to set up the DCP environment than the in-person event. Conclusions: The in-person and DCP delivery of death notification training were comparable in their ability to improve individual knowledge, confidence, and performance. Additional preparation time, training, and practice with DCPs may be required for SPs, faculty, and learners less familiar with this technology.

Prospective study of emergency medicine provider wellness across ten academic and community hospitals during the initial surge of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: While COVID-19 has had far-reaching consequences on society and health care providers, there is a paucity of research exploring frontline emergency medicine (EM) provider wellness over the course of a pandemic. The objective of this study was to assess the well-being, resilience, burnout, and wellness factors and needs of EM physicians and advanced practice providers (e.g., nurse practitioners and physician assistants; APPs) during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A descriptive, prospective, cohort survey study of EM physicians and APPs was performed across ten emergency departments in a single state, including academic and community settings. Participants were recruited via email to complete four weekly, voluntary, anonymous questionnaires comprised of customized and validated tools for assessing wellness (Well Being Index), burnout (Physician Work Life Study item), and resilience (Brief Resilience Scale) during the initial acceleration phase of COVID-19. Univariate and multivariate analysis with Chi-squared, Fisher's Exact, and logistic regression was performed. RESULTS: Of 213 eligible participants, response rates ranged from 31 to 53% over four weeks. Women comprised 54 to 60% of responses. Nonrespondent characteristics were similar to respondents. Concern for personal safety decreased from 85 to 61% (p < 0.001). Impact on basic self-care declined from 66 to 32% (p < 0.001). Symptoms of stress, anxiety, or fear was initially 83% and reduced to 66% (p = 0.009). Reported strain on relationships and feelings of isolation affected > 50% of respondents initially without significant change (p = 0.05 and p = 0.30 respectively). Women were nearly twice as likely to report feelings of isolation as men (OR 1.95; 95% CI 1.82-5.88). Working part-time carried twice the risk of burnout (OR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.10-5.47). Baseline resilience was normal to high. Provider well-being improved over the four weeks (30 to 14%; p = 0.01), but burnout did not significantly change (30 to 22%; p = 0.39). CONCLUSION: This survey of frontline EM providers, including physicians and APPs, during the initial surge of COVID-19 found that despite being a resilient group, the majority experienced stress, anxiety, fear, and concerns about personal safety due to COVID-19, putting many at risk for burnout. The sustained impact of the pandemic on EM provider wellness deserves further investigation to guide targeted interventions.

National preparedness survey of pediatric intensive care units with simulation centers during the coronavirus pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease pandemic caught many pediatric hospitals unprepared and has forced pediatric healthcare systems to scramble as they examine and plan for the optimal allocation of medical resources for the highest priority patients. There is limited data describing pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) preparedness and their health worker protections. AIM: To describe the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) preparedness efforts among a set of PICUs within a simulation-based network nationwide. METHODS: A cross-sectional multi-center national survey of PICU medical director(s) from children's hospitals across the United States. The questionnaire was developed and reviewed by physicians with expertise in pediatric critical care, disaster readiness, human factors, and survey development. Thirty-five children's hospitals were identified for recruitment through a long-established national research network. The questions focused on six themes: (1) PICU and medical director demographics; (2) Pediatric patient flow during the pandemic; (3) Changes to the staffing models related to the pandemic; (4) Use of personal protective equipment (PPE); (5) Changes in clinical practice and innovations; and (6) Current modalities of training including simulation. RESULTS: We report on survey responses from 22 of 35 PICUs (63%). The majority of PICUs were located within children's hospitals (87%). All PICUs cared for pediatric patients with COVID-19 at the time of the survey. The majority of PICUs (83.4%) witnessed decreases in non-COVID-19 patients, 43% had COVID-19 dedicated units, and 74.6% pivoted to accept adult COVID-19 patients. All PICUs implemented changes to their staffing models with the most common changes being changes in COVID-19 patient room assignment in 50% of surveyed PICUs and introducing remote patient monitoring in 36% of the PICU units. Ninety-five percent of PICUs conducted training for donning and doffing of enhanced PPE. Even 6 months into the pandemic, one-third of PICUs across the United States reported shortages in PPE. The most common training formats for PPE were hands-on training (73%) and video-based content (82%). The most common concerns related to COVID-19 practice were changes in clinical protocols and guidelines (50%). The majority of PICUs implemented significant changes in their airway management (82%) and cardiac arrest management protocols in COVID-19 patients (68%). Simulation-based training was the most commonly utilized training modality (82%), whereas team training (73%) and team dynamics (77%) were the most common training objectives. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of surveyed PICUs reported on large changes in their preparedness and training efforts before and during the pandemic. PICUs implemented broad strategies including modifications to staffing, PPE usage, workflow, and clinical practice, while using simulation as the preferred training modality. Further research is needed to advance the level of preparedness, support staff assuredness, and support deep learning about which preparedness actions were effective and what lessons are needed to improve PICU care and staff protection for the next COVID-19 patient waves.

Longitudinal Prospective Study of Emergency Medicine Provider Wellness Across Ten Academic and Community Hospitals During the Initial Surge of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: While the coronavirus (COVID-19) has had far-reaching consequences on society and health care providers, there is a paucity of research exploring emergency medicine (EM) provider wellness over the course of a pandemic. The objective of this study was to assess the well-being, resilience, burnout, and wellness factors and needs of EM physicians and advanced practice providers (APPs) during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A longitudinal, descriptive, prospective cohort survey study of 213 EM physicians and APPs was performed across ten emergency departments in a single state, including academic and community settings. Participants were recruited via email to complete four weekly, voluntary, anonymous questionnaires comprised of customized and validated tools for assessing wellness (Well Being Index), burnout (Physician Work Life Study item), and resilience (Brief Resilience Scale) during the initial acceleration phase of COVID-19. Univariate and multivariate analysis with Chi-squared, Fisher’s Exact, and logistic regression was performed. Results: Of 213 eligible participants, response rates ranged from 31 to 53% over four weeks. Women comprised 54 to 60% of responses. Nonrespondent characteristics were similar to respondents. Concern for personal safety decreased from 85% to 61% (p<0.001). Impact on basic self-care declined from 66% to 32% (p<0.001). Symptoms of stress, anxiety or fear was initially 83% and reduced to 66% (p=0.009). Reported strain on relationships and feelings of isolation affected >50% of respondents initially without significant change (p=0.05 and p=0.30 respectively). Women were nearly twice as likely to report feelings of isolation as men (OR 1.95; 95%CI 1.82-5.88). Working part-time carried twice the risk of burnout (OR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.10-5.47). Baseline resilience was normal to high. Provider well-being improved over the four-weeks (30% to 14%; p=0.01), but burnout did not significantly change (30% to 22%; p=0.39). Conclusion: This survey of frontline EM providers during the initial surge of COVID-19 found that despite being a resilient group, the majority experienced stress, anxiety, fear, and concerns about personal safety due to COVID-19, with many at risk for burnout. The sustained impact of the pandemic on EM provider wellness deserves further investigation to guide targeted interventions.

Effect of an Aerosol Box on Intubation in Simulated Emergency Department Airways: A Randomized Crossover Study.

INTRODUCTION: The use of transparent plastic aerosol boxes as protective barriers during endotracheal intubation has been advocated during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic. There is evidence of worldwide distribution of such devices, but some experts have warned of possible negative impacts of their use. The objective of this study was to measure the effect of an aerosol box on intubation performance across a variety of simulated difficult airway scenarios in the emergency department. METHODS: This was a randomized, crossover design study. Participants were randomized to intubate one of five airway scenarios with and without an aerosol box in place, with randomization of intubation sequence. The primary outcome was time to intubation. Secondary outcomes included number of intubation attempts, Cormack-Lehane view, percent of glottic opening, and resident physician perception of intubation difficulty. RESULTS: Forty-eight residents performed 96 intubations. Time to intubation was significantly longer with box use than without (mean 17 seconds [range 6-68 seconds] vs mean 10 seconds [range 5-40 seconds], p <0.001). Participants perceived intubation as being significantly more difficult with the aerosol box. There were no significant differences in the number of attempts or quality of view obtained. CONCLUSION: Use of an aerosol box during difficult endotracheal intubation increases the time to intubation and perceived difficulty across a range of simulated ED patients.