Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
Ann Work Expo Health ; 2022 Jul 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1948159

ABSTRACT

Face shields (also referred to as visors), goggles and safety glasses have been worn during the COVID-19 pandemic as one measure to control transmission of the virus. However, their effectiveness in controlling facial exposure to cough droplets is not well established and standard tests for evaluating eye protection for this application are limited. A method was developed to evaluate face shields, goggles, and safety glasses as a control measure to protect the wearer against cough droplets. The method uses a semi-quantitative assessment of facial droplet deposition. A cough simulator was developed to generate droplets comparable to those from a human cough. The droplets consisted of a UV fluorescent marker (fluorescein) in water. Fourteen face shields, four pairs of goggles and one pair of safety glasses were evaluated by mounting them on two different sizes of breathing manikin head and challenging them with the simulated cough. The manikin head was positioned in seven orientations relative to the cough simulator to represent various potential occupational exposure scenarios, for example, a nurse standing over a patient. Droplet deposition in the eyes, nose and mouth regions were visualised following three 'coughs'. Face shields, goggles, and safety glasses reduced, but did not eliminate exposure to the wearer from droplets such as those produced by a human cough. The level of protection differed based on the design of the personal protective equipment and the relative orientation of the wearer to the cough. For example, face shields, and goggles offered the greatest protection when a cough challenge was face on or from above and the least protection when a cough challenge was from below. Face shields were also evaluated as source control to protect others from the wearer. Results suggested that if a coughing person wears a face shield, it can provide some protection from cough droplets to those standing directly in front of the wearer.

2.
Cureus ; 14(5): e24711, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1924622

ABSTRACT

Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis is a rare autoimmune vasculitis that is classically characterized by effects on the upper respiratory tract, lungs, and kidneys. Delay in diagnosis is often attributed to variable and sequential presentation of symptoms rather than concurrent symptomatology. It is important to recognize the wide range of initial presenting symptoms as early diagnosis and treatment is critical in preventing potentially irreversible damage resulting from delayed diagnosis. We present a case of a 29-year-old male with history of mixed sensorineural-conductive hearing loss presumed to be secondary to chronic otitis media who presented to the emergency department with complaint of hematemesis with a subsequent diagnosis of granulomatosis with polyangiitis.

3.
EuropePMC; 2022.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-329224

ABSTRACT

Face shields (also referred to as visors), goggles and safety glasses have been worn during the COVID-19 pandemic as one measure to control transmission of the virus. However, their effectiveness in controlling facial exposure to cough droplets is not well established and standard tests for evaluating eye protection for this application are limited. A method was developed to evaluate face shields, goggles and safety glasses as a control measure to protect the wearer against cough droplets. The method uses a semi-quantitative assessment of facial droplet deposition. A cough simulator was developed to generate droplets comparable to those from a human cough. The droplets consisted of a UV fluorescent marker (fluorescein) in water. Fourteen face shields, four pairs of goggles and one pair of safety glasses were evaluated by mounting them on two different sizes of breathing manikin head and challenging them with the simulated cough. The manikin head was positioned in seven orientations relative to the cough simulator to represent various potential occupational exposure scenarios, for example, a nurse standing over a patient. Droplet deposition in the eyes, nose and mouth regions were visualised following three 'coughs'. Face shields, goggles and safety glasses reduced, but did not eliminate exposure to the wearer from droplets such as those produced by a human cough. The level of protection differed based on the design of the personal protective equipment and the relative orientation of the wearer to the cough. For example, face shields and goggles offered the greatest protection when a cough challenge was face on or from above and the least protection when a cough challenge was from below. Face shields were also evaluated as source control to protect others from the wearer. Results suggested that if a coughing person wears a face shield, it can provide some protection from cough droplets to those standing directly in front of the wearer.

5.
Lancet ; 397(10288): 2012-2022, 2021 05 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1219074

ABSTRACT

The health and care sector plays a valuable role in improving population health and societal wellbeing, protecting people from the financial consequences of illness, reducing health and income inequalities, and supporting economic growth. However, there is much debate regarding the appropriate level of funding for health and care in the UK. In this Health Policy paper, we look at the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and historical spending in the UK and comparable countries, assess the role of private spending, and review spending projections to estimate future needs. Public spending on health has increased by 3·7% a year on average since the National Health Service (NHS) was founded in 1948 and, since then, has continued to assume a larger share of both the economy and government expenditure. In the decade before the ongoing pandemic started, the rate of growth of government spending for the health and care sector slowed. We argue that without average growth in public spending on health of at least 4% per year in real terms, there is a real risk of degradation of the NHS, reductions in coverage of benefits, increased inequalities, and increased reliance on private financing. A similar, if not higher, level of growth in public spending on social care is needed to provide high standards of care and decent terms and conditions for social care staff, alongside an immediate uplift in public spending to implement long-overdue reforms recommended by the Dilnot Commission to improve financial protection. COVID-19 has highlighted major issues in the capacity and resilience of the health and care system. We recommend an independent review to examine the precise amount of additional funds that are required to better equip the UK to withstand further acute shocks and major threats to health.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/economics , Health Expenditures/statistics & numerical data , Health Policy/economics , State Medicine/economics , Financing, Government , Humans , Social Support , United Kingdom
7.
BMJ Open ; 10(12): e040580, 2020 Dec 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-955465

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) has caused an international pandemic of respiratory illness, resulting in significant healthcare and economic turmoil. To date, no robust vaccine or treatment has been identified. Elemental zinc has previously been demonstrated to have beneficial effects on coronaviruses and other viral respiratory infections due to its effect on RNA polymerase. Additionally, zinc has well-demonstrated protective effects against hypoxic injury-a clear mechanism of end-organ injury in respiratory distress syndrome. We aimed to assess the effect of high-dose intravenous zinc (HDIVZn) on SARS-CoV-2 infection. The end of study analyses will evaluate the reduction of impact of oxygen saturations or requirement of oxygen supplementation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We designed a double-blind randomised controlled trial of daily HDIVZn (0.5 mg/kg) versus placebo. Primary outcome measures are lowest oxygen saturation (or greatest level of supplemental oxygenation) for non-ventilated patients and worst PaO2/FiO2 for ventilated patients. Following power calculations, 60 hospitalised patients and 100 ventilated patients will be recruited to demonstrate a 20% difference. The duration of follow-up is up to the point of discharge. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained through the independent Human Research Ethics Committee. Participant recruitment will commence in May 2020. Results will be published in peer-reviewed medical journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN126200000454976.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , Zinc/administration & dosage , Administration, Intravenous , Adult , Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Hypoxia/prevention & control , Male , Oxygen/blood , Pandemics , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Zinc/adverse effects
8.
Infect Dis Health ; 26(2): 104-109, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-933122

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Due to regional shortages some health services have proposed using surgical masks manufactured from sterilisation wrap. However, there has been little assessment of the safety of this practice. Therefore, we developed our own prototypes and evaluated whether they met regulatory standards. METHODS: Surgical mask prototypes were manufactured from two thickness grades of commercial sterilisation wrap. Safety was assessed in the context of regulatory standards. As it was not previously reported, we developed and performed differential pressure and synthetic blood penetration resistance experiments in accordance with official methodology. RESULTS: Bacterial filtration efficiency was comparable between sterilisation wrap and commercial surgical masks. Both prototypes met regulatory standards for synthetic blood resistance, whilst only our thinner mask fulfilled acceptable differential pressure ('breathability') thresholds. CONCLUSION: Acceptable barrier and breathability properties can be achieved with surgical masks produced from sterilisation wrap. Therefore, this may be a reasonable method to supplement stock if required. Unless there are shortages mandating alternatives, health-care workers should always use approved personal protective equipment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Masks/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Sterilization , Health Personnel , Humans , Masks/supply & distribution , N95 Respirators/standards , Personal Protective Equipment
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL