Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 188
Filter
2.
Infect Dis Clin North Am ; 36(1): 15-37, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2130978

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 is a nonspecific viral illness caused by a novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, and led to an ongoing global pandemic. Transmission is primarily human-to-human via contact with respiratory particles containing infectious virus. The risk of transmission to health care personnel is low with proper use of personal protective equipment, including gowns, gloves, N95 or surgical mask, and eye protection. Additional measures affecting the risk of transmission include physical distancing, hand hygiene, routine cleaning and disinfection, appropriate air handling and ventilation, and public health interventions such as universal masking and stay-at-home orders.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Infection Control , Pandemics , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Infection Control/instrumentation , Infection Control/methods , Masks , Personal Protective Equipment
3.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(1): 75-83, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2096434

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Shortages of personal protective equipment during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have led to the extended use or reuse of single-use respirators and surgical masks by frontline healthcare workers. The evidence base underpinning such practices warrants examination. OBJECTIVES: To synthesize current guidance and systematic review evidence on extended use, reuse, or reprocessing of single-use surgical masks or filtering face-piece respirators. DATA SOURCES: We used the World Health Organization, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Public Health England websites to identify guidance. We used Medline, PubMed, Epistemonikos, Cochrane Database, and preprint servers for systematic reviews. METHODS: Two reviewers conducted screening and data extraction. The quality of included systematic reviews was appraised using AMSTAR-2. Findings were narratively synthesized. RESULTS: In total, 6 guidance documents were identified. Levels of detail and consistency across documents varied. They included 4 high-quality systematic reviews: 3 focused on reprocessing (decontamination) of N95 respirators and 1 focused on reprocessing of surgical masks. Vaporized hydrogen peroxide and ultraviolet germicidal irradiation were highlighted as the most promising reprocessing methods, but evidence on the relative efficacy and safety of different methods was limited. We found no well-established methods for reprocessing respirators at scale. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on the impact of extended use and reuse of surgical masks and respirators is limited, and gaps and inconsistencies exist in current guidance. Where extended use or reuse is being practiced, healthcare organizations should ensure that policies and systems are in place to ensure these practices are carried out safely and in line with available guidance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Equipment Reuse/standards , Infection Control/instrumentation , Masks/virology , N95 Respirators/virology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Risk Management/methods , Risk Management/standards
5.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 41(9): 1003-1010, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2096313

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 has been implicated in the largest recorded coronavirus outbreak to date. Initially, most COVID-19 cases were in China, but the virus has spread to more than 184 countries worldwide, and the United States currently has more cases than any other country. OBJECTIVE: With person-to-person spread expanding in the United States, we describe hospital preparedness for managing suspected and confirmed COVID-19 patients. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey focused on various elements of respiratory disease preparedness. SETTING: Critical access hospitals (CAHs) and acute-care hospitals (ACHs) in Idaho. METHODS: The electronic survey was sent to infection preventionists (IPs) and nurse administrators in 44 hospitals in Idaho. RESULTS: Overall, 32 (73%) hospitals responded to the survey. Participating facilities reported their preparedness with respect to existing, formalized structures for managing infectious disease incidents-specifically COVID-19-as well as availability of resources, such as isolation rooms and personal protective equipment, for safely managing suspected and confirmed COVID-19 cases. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals covered by the survey had varying levels of preparedness for managing COVID-19 cases, with differences across the various categories of interest in this study. Although the study reveals strengths, including in application of emergency management and infection control frameworks, it also suggests that other areas, such as consistent implementation of federal guidelines and requirements for infection prevention, are potential areas for strengthening preparedness for SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory pathogens with pandemic potential.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Health Resources/supply & distribution , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Infection Control/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , COVID-19 , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Idaho , Infection Control/instrumentation , Infection Control/methods , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , Quarantine/methods , Quarantine/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2
7.
Turk J Med Sci ; 51(SI-1): 3238-3245, 2021 12 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1726146

ABSTRACT

Face masks are devices worn over the mouth and nose to protect against splashes, infectious respiratory droplets, or aerosols generated during breathing or coughing according to their filtering capacity. Medical masks, respirators, or cloth masks have been used for source control and for the protection of the exposed. After the first case on March 11, 2020, in Turkey, National COVID-19 Scientific Advisory Board published various contents for the correct use of masks. Medical face masks have been used in healthcare settings for both source control and potential personal protection before the COVID-19 pandemic. Adverse events associated with using masks are very sparse and mainly associated with tight-fitting respirators or dermatitis due to prolonged use and should not be a reason for refusal to use. Studies suggest the use of masks mainly in the healthcare facilities but also in the community for source control of people who have respiratory symptoms of communicable diseases other than COVID-19. They are likely to be acceptable if recommended, particularly in more severe epidemics and pandemics. Metaanalysis, case control, cross sectional, cohort, retrospective, retrospective cross sectional, research, randomized controlled, and controlled comparison studies were reviewed on the protective effect of masks on COVID-19 with laboratory evidence. Optimum use of face masks with additional precautions has been found to be useful controlling the spread of the respiratory viruses such as SARS-CoV-2 in most of the studies and metaanalyses. As a conclusion, the recent evidence in COVID-19 pandemic is consistent with the previous studies which have shown association between face mask use and decreased risk of viral infections, and medical face mask use should be encouraged both for the community and healthcare facilities along with other infection control measures such as hand hygiene, during outbreaks when there is widespread community transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Infection Control/instrumentation , Masks , Pandemics/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Respiratory Aerosols and Droplets , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
8.
ACS Appl Mater Interfaces ; 14(9): 11068-11077, 2022 Mar 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1713108

ABSTRACT

Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, it is evident that viral spread is mediated through several different transmission pathways. Reduction of these transmission pathways is urgently needed to control the spread of viruses between infected and susceptible individuals. Herein, we report the use of pathogen-repellent plastic wraps (RepelWrap) with engineered surface structures at multiple length scales (nanoscale to microscale) as a means of reducing the indirect contact transmission of viruses through fomites. To quantify viral repellency, we developed a touch-based viral quantification assay to mimic the interaction of a contaminated human touch with a surface through the modification of traditional viral quantification methods (viral plaque and TCID50 assays). These studies demonstrate that RepelWrap reduced contamination with an enveloped DNA virus as well as the human coronavirus 229E (HuCoV-229E) by more than 4 log 10 (>99.99%) compared to a standard commercially available polyethylene plastic wrap. In addition, RepelWrap maintained its repellent properties after repeated 300 touches and did not show an accumulation in viral titer after multiple contacts with contaminated surfaces, while increases were seen on other commonly used surfaces. These findings show the potential use of repellent surfaces in reducing viral contamination on surfaces, which could, in turn, reduce the surface-based spread and transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Coronavirus 229E, Human/growth & development , Equipment Contamination/prevention & control , Infection Control/instrumentation , Plastics/chemistry , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Infection Control/methods , SARS-CoV-2/growth & development , Surface Properties
9.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 10(1): 164, 2021 11 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1538091

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Few studies have investigated the contamination of personal protective equipment (PPE) during the management of patients with severe-to-critical coronavirus disease (COVID-19). This study aimed to determine the necessity of coveralls and foot covers for body protection during the management of COVID-19 patients. METHODS: PPE samples were collected from the coveralls of physicians exiting a room after the management of a patient with severe-to-critical COVID-19 within 14 days after the patient's symptom onset. The surface of coveralls was categorized into coverall-only parts (frontal surface of the head, anterior neck, dorsal surface of the foot cover, and back and hip) and gown-covered parts (the anterior side of the forearm and the abdomen). Sampling of the high-contact surfaces in the patient's environment was performed. We attempted to identify significant differences in contamination with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) between the coverall-only and gown-covered parts. RESULTS: A total of 105 swabs from PPEs and 28 swabs from patient rooms were collected. Of the PPE swabs, only three (2.8%) swabs from the gown-covered parts were contaminated with SARS-CoV-2. However, 23 of the 28 sites (82.1%) from patient rooms were contaminated. There was a significant difference in the contamination of PPE between the coverall-only and gown-covered parts (0.0 vs 10.0%, p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Coverall contamination rarely occurred while managing severe-to-critical COVID-19 patients housed in negative pressure rooms in the early stages of the illness. Long-sleeved gowns may be used in the management of COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Infection Control/instrumentation , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Protective Clothing , Humans , Patient Isolation , Patients' Rooms , Physicians
10.
Adv Skin Wound Care ; 34(12): 651-655, 2021 Dec 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1528177

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency of hand dermatitis among nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic and factors affecting its prevalence. METHODS: The research sample consisted of 175 nurses working in state hospitals. Research data were collected via Google survey between September and October 2020. The data were collected using a sociodemographic data collection form, and a self-assessment form was used to determine dermatologic symptoms. RESULTS: The frequency of hand dermatitis among nurses was 70.9%. A statistically significant difference was found between sex, allergy history, and increased frequency of handwashing and the frequency of hand dermatitis. No significant difference in terms of the frequency of hand dermatitis was found between nurses who provided care to patients who were COVID-19 positive versus nurses who provided care to patients who were COVID-19 negative. However, the frequency of washing hands and using hand disinfectants and hand creams was found to have increased significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the prepandemic period. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of hand dermatitis increased among nurses during the pandemic. The increased frequency of handwashing during the pandemic poses a risk for hand dermatitis among nurses, although this should not discourage nurses from appropriate hygiene.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis/diagnosis , Hand/physiopathology , Nurses/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Dermatitis/epidemiology , Female , Hand Disinfection , Humans , Infection Control/instrumentation , Infection Control/methods , Male , Middle Aged , Personal Protective Equipment/adverse effects , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , Prevalence , Turkey/epidemiology
11.
Curr Opin Ophthalmol ; 31(5): 374-379, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1511065

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The use of slit lamp shields has been recommended by the American Academy of Ophthalmology as an infection control measure during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. However, there is limited evidence regarding its efficacy to reduce viral transmission risks. We aim to provide an evidence-based approach to optimize the use of slit lamp shields during clinical examination. RECENT FINDINGS: Respiratory droplets from coughing and sneezing can travel up to 50 m/s and over a distance of 2 m, with a potential area of spread of 616 cm. Slit lamp shields confer added protection against large droplets but are limited against smaller particles. A larger shield curved toward the ophthalmologist and positioned closer to the patient increases protection against large droplets. A potential improvement to the design of such shields is the use of hydrophilic materials with antiviral properties which may help to minimize splashing of infectious droplets, reducing transmission risks. These include gold or silver nanoparticles and graphene oxide. SUMMARY: Slit lamp shields serve as a barrier for large droplets, but its protection against smaller droplets is undetermined. It should be large, positioned close to the patient, and used in tandem with routine basic disinfection practices.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Infection Control/instrumentation , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Protective Devices , Slit Lamp , COVID-19 , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
13.
Heart Rhythm ; 19(2): 206-216, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1482622

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation rates as well as the clinical and procedural characteristics and outcomes in patients with known active coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are unknown. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to gather information regarding CIED procedures during active COVID-19, performed with personal protective equipment, based on an international survey. METHODS: Fifty-three centers from 13 countries across 4 continents provided information on 166 patients with known active COVID-19 who underwent a CIED procedure. RESULTS: The CIED procedure rate in 133,655 hospitalized COVID-19 patients ranged from 0 to 16.2 per 1000 patients (P <.001). Most devices were implanted due to high-degree/complete atrioventricular block (112 [67.5%]) or sick sinus syndrome (31 [18.7%]). Of the 166 patients in the study survey, the 30-day complication rate was 13.9% and the 180-day mortality rate was 9.6%. One patient had a fatal outcome as a direct result of the procedure. Differences in patient and procedural characteristics and outcomes were found between Europe and North America. An older population (76.6 vs 66 years; P <.001) with a nonsignificant higher complication rate (16.5% vs 7.7%; P = .2) was observed in Europe vs North America, whereas higher rates of critically ill patients (33.3% vs 3.3%; P <.001) and mortality (26.9% vs 5%; P = .002) were observed in North America vs Europe. CONCLUSION: CIED procedure rates during known active COVID-19 disease varied greatly, from 0 to 16.2 per 1000 hospitalized COVID-19 patients worldwide. Patients with active COVID-19 infection who underwent CIED implantation had high complication and mortality rates. Operators should take these risks into consideration before proceeding with CIED implantation in active COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
Atrioventricular Block , COVID-19 , Infection Control , Postoperative Complications , Prosthesis Implantation , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Sick Sinus Syndrome , Aged , Atrioventricular Block/epidemiology , Atrioventricular Block/therapy , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Comorbidity , Defibrillators, Implantable/statistics & numerical data , Female , Global Health/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infection Control/instrumentation , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/organization & administration , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pacemaker, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Postoperative Complications/diagnosis , Postoperative Complications/mortality , Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Prosthesis Implantation/instrumentation , Prosthesis Implantation/mortality , Risk Factors , Sick Sinus Syndrome/epidemiology , Sick Sinus Syndrome/therapy , Surveys and Questionnaires
14.
BMJ ; 369: m2195, 2020 06 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1430181

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To examine the protective effects of appropriate personal protective equipment for frontline healthcare professionals who provided care for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). DESIGN: Cross sectional study. SETTING: Four hospitals in Wuhan, China. PARTICIPANTS: 420 healthcare professionals (116 doctors and 304 nurses) who were deployed to Wuhan by two affiliated hospitals of Sun Yat-sen University and Nanfang Hospital of Southern Medical University for 6-8 weeks from 24 January to 7 April 2020. These study participants were provided with appropriate personal protective equipment to deliver healthcare to patients admitted to hospital with covid-19 and were involved in aerosol generating procedures. 77 healthcare professionals with no exposure history to covid-19 and 80 patients who had recovered from covid-19 were recruited to verify the accuracy of antibody testing. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Covid-19 related symptoms (fever, cough, and dyspnoea) and evidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, defined as a positive test for virus specific nucleic acids in nasopharyngeal swabs, or a positive test for IgM or IgG antibodies in the serum samples. RESULTS: The average age of study participants was 35.8 years and 68.1% (286/420) were women. These study participants worked 4-6 hour shifts for an average of 5.4 days a week; they worked an average of 16.2 hours each week in intensive care units. All 420 study participants had direct contact with patients with covid-19 and performed at least one aerosol generating procedure. During the deployment period in Wuhan, none of the study participants reported covid-19 related symptoms. When the participants returned home, they all tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 specific nucleic acids and IgM or IgG antibodies (95% confidence interval 0.0 to 0.7%). CONCLUSION: Before a safe and effective vaccine becomes available, healthcare professionals remain susceptible to covid-19. Despite being at high risk of exposure, study participants were appropriately protected and did not contract infection or develop protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2. Healthcare systems must give priority to the procurement and distribution of personal protective equipment, and provide adequate training to healthcare professionals in its use.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Health Personnel , Infection Control/instrumentation , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Adult , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , China , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2
15.
J Infect Dev Ctries ; 15(8): 1074-1079, 2021 08 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1405468

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Public life in China is gradually returning to normal with strong measures in coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) control. Because of the long-term effects of COVID-19, medical institutions had to make timely adjustments to control policies and priorities to balance between COVID-19 prevention and daily medical services. METHODOLOGY: The framework for infection prevention and control in the inpatient department was effectively organized at both hospital and department levels. A series of prevention and control strategies was implemented under this leadership: application of rigorous risk assessment and triage before admission through a query list; classifying patients into three risk levels and providing corresponding medical treatment and emergency handling; establishing new ward visiting criteria for visitors; designing procedures for PPE and stockpile management; executing specialized disinfection and medical waste policies. RESULTS: Till June 2020, the bed occupancy had recovered from 20.0% to 88.1%. In total, 13045 patients were received in our hospital, of which 54 and 127 patients were identified as high-risk and medium-risk, respectively, and 2 patients in the high-risk group were eventually laboratory-confirmed with COVID-19. No hospital-acquired infection of COVID-19 has been observed since the emergency appeared. CONCLUSIONS: The strategies ensured early detection and targeted prevention of COVID-19 following the COVID-19 pandemic, which improved the recovery of medical services after the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Infection Control/methods , COVID-19/epidemiology , China/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/virology , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/standards , Humans , Infection Control/instrumentation , Inpatients/statistics & numerical data , Patient Isolation/methods , Personal Protective Equipment , Risk Assessment , Triage
18.
J Appl Clin Med Phys ; 21(12): 325-328, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1384081

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To investigate the feasibility and practicality of ultraviolet (UV) germicidal irradiation of the inner bore of a computed tomography (CT) gantry as a means of viral decontamination. METHOD: A UV lamp (PADNUT 38 W, 253 nm UV-C light tube) and UV-C dosimeter (GENERAL UV-C Digital Light Meter No. UV512C) were used to measure irradiance throughout the inner bore of a CT scanner gantry. Irradiance (units µW/cm2 ) was related to the time required to achieve 6-log viral kill (10-6 survival fraction). RESULTS: A warm-up time of ~120 s was required for the lamp to reach stable irradiance. Irradiance at the scan plane (z = 0 cm) of the CT scanner was 580.9 µW/cm2 , reducing to ~350 µW/cm2 at z = ±20 cm toward the front or back of the gantry. The angular distribution of irradiation was uniform within 10% coefficient of variation. A conservative estimate suggests at least 6-log kill (survival fraction ≤ 10-6 ) of viral RNA within ±20 cm of the scan plane with an irradiation time of 120 s from cold start. More conservatively, running the lamp for 180 s (3 min) or 300 s (5 min) from cold start is estimated to yield survival fraction <<10-7 survival fraction within ±20 cm of the scan plane. CONCLUSION: Ultraviolet irradiation of the inner bore of the CT gantry can be achieved with a simple UV-C lamp attached to the CT couch. Such practice could augment manual wipe-down procedures, improve safety for CT technologists or housekeeping staff, and could potentially reduce turnover time between scanning sessions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Disinfection/methods , Infection Control/methods , Tomography Scanners, X-Ray Computed , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/instrumentation , Calibration , Decontamination/instrumentation , Diagnostic Imaging/methods , Infection Control/instrumentation , RNA, Viral/radiation effects , Radiometry , SARS-CoV-2/radiation effects , Ultraviolet Rays
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL