Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 424
Filter
1.
PLoS One ; 17(3): e0264232, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1753189

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Health care workers (HCWs) are particularly exposed to COVID-19 and therefore it is important to study preventive measures in this population. AIM: To investigate socio-demographic factors and professional practice associated with the risk of COVID-19 among HCWs in health establishments in Normandy, France. METHODS: A cross-sectional and 3 case-control studies using bootstrap methods were conducted in order to explore the possible risk factors that lead to SARS-CoV2 transmission within HCWs. Case-control studies focused on risk factors associated with (a) care of COVID-19 patients, (b) care of non COVID-19 patients and (c) contacts between colleagues. PARTICIPANTS: 2,058 respondents, respectively 1,363 (66.2%) and 695 (33.8%) in medical and medico-social establishments, including HCW with and without contact with patients. RESULTS: 301 participants (14.6%) reported having been infected by SARS-CoV2. When caring for COVID-19 patients, HCWs who declared wearing respirators, either for all patient care (ORa 0.39; 95% CI: 0.29-0.51) or only when exposed to aerosol-generating procedures (ORa 0.56; 95% CI: 0.43-0.70), had a lower risk of infection compared with HCWs who declared wearing mainly surgical masks. During care of non COVID-19 patients, wearing mainly a respirator was associated with a higher risk of infection (ORa 1.84; 95% CI: 1.06-3.37). An increased risk was also found for HCWs who changed uniform in workplace changing rooms (ORa 1.93; 95% CI: 1.63-2.29). CONCLUSION: Correct use of PPE adapted to the situation and risk level is essential in protecting HCWs against infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control/instrumentation , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Health Personnel/classification , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Case-Control Studies , Cross-Sectional Studies , Disease Transmission, Infectious/statistics & numerical data , Female , France , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Exposure/statistics & numerical data , Personal Protective Equipment , Professional Practice , Risk Reduction Behavior
2.
PLoS One ; 17(2): e0262830, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1690735

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: During the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been suggestions that various techniques could be employed to improve the fit and, therefore, the effectiveness of face masks. It is well recognized that improving fit tends to improve mask effectiveness, but whether these fit modifiers are reliable remains unexplored. In this study, we assess a range of common "fit hacks" to determine their ability to improve mask performance. METHODS: Between July and September 2020, qualitative fit testing was performed in an indoor living space. We used quantitative fit testing to assess the fit of both surgical masks and KN95 masks, with and without 'fit hacks', on four participants. Seven fit hacks were evaluated to assess impact on fit. Additionally, one participant applied each fit hack multiple times to assess how reliable hacks were when reapplied. A convenience of four participants took part in the study, three females and one male with a head circumference range of 54 to 60 centimetres. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The use of pantyhose, tape, and rubber bands were effective for most participants. A pantyhose overlayer was observed to be the most effective hack. High degrees of variation were noted between participants. However, little variation was noted within participants, with hacks generally showing similar benefit each time they were applied on a single participant. An inspection of the fit hacks once applied showed that individual facial features may have a significant impact on fit, especially the nose bridge. CONCLUSIONS: Fit hacks can be used to effectively improve the fit of surgical and KN95 masks, enhancing the protection provided to the wearer. However, many of the most effective hacks are very uncomfortable and unlikely to be tolerated for extended periods of time. The development of effective fit-improvement solutions remains a critical issue in need of further development.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , N95 Respirators/trends , COVID-19/transmission , Female , Humans , Male , Masks/trends , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment/trends , Physical Functional Performance , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity
3.
J Occup Environ Hyg ; 19(4): 223-233, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1684399

ABSTRACT

In 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended the use of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health-certified Elastomeric Half Mask Respirators equipped with N95 or P100 respirator filter cartridges for protection against the SARS-CoV-2 viral agent, as a viable alternative to N95 filtering facepiece respirators. Additionally, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations stated that based on current practice, it was acceptable to repeatedly use these filter cartridges for up to 12 months as a contingency capacity strategy during anticipated respirator shortages. To validate this recommendation, an investigation was undertaken in which Elastomeric Half Mask Respirators equipped with P100 respirator filter cartridges were deployed and used by healthcare professionals in clinical settings (i.e., inpatient nursing units, operating rooms) for extended periods. These filter cartridges were subsequently tested to accurately quantify their filtration efficiency and breathing resistance to determine if they continued to meet National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health's performance requirements. Findings from this investigation confirmed that an Elastomeric Half Mask Respirator when equipped with a P100 filter cartridge continues to provide a high level of aerosol filtration performance (≥99.97%) and exhibits little change in breathing resistance even after 12 months of repeated use (i.e., wear, cleaning, and disinfection between patient use and at the end of work shift) in healthcare settings.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Occupational Exposure , Respiratory Protective Devices , COVID-19/prevention & control , Delivery of Health Care , Filtration , Humans , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , United States , Ventilators, Mechanical
6.
Anesth Analg ; 134(2): 348-356, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1635164

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected the personal and professional lives of all health care workers. Anesthesiologists frequently perform virus-aerosolizing procedures (eg, intubation and extubation) that place them at increased risk of infection. We sought to determine how the initial COVID-19 outbreak affected members of the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia (SPA) on both personal and professional levels. Specifically, we examined the potential effects of gender and age on personal stress, burnout, sleep deprivation, anxiety, depression, assessed job satisfaction, and explored financial impact. METHODS: After receiving approval from the SPA Committees for Research and Quality and Safety and the Colorado Multiple Institutional Review Board, we e-mailed a questionnaire to all 3245 SPA members. The survey included 22 questions related to well-being and 13 questions related to effects of COVID-19 on current and future practice, finances, retirement planning, academic time and productivity, and clinical and home responsibilities. To address low initial response rates and quantify nonresponse bias, we sent a shortened follow-up survey to a randomly selected subsample (n = 100) of SPA members who did not respond to the initial survey. Response differences between the 2 cohorts were determined. RESULTS: A total of 561 (17%) members responded to the initial questionnaire. Because of COVID-19, 21.7% of respondents said they would change their clinical responsibilities, and 10.6% would decrease their professional working time. Women were more likely than men to anticipate a future COVID-19-related job change (odds ratio [OR] = 1.92, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-2.63; P = .011), perhaps because of increased home responsibilities (OR = 2.63, 95% CI, 1.74-4.00; P < .001). Additionally, 14.2% of respondents planned to retire early, and 11.9% planned to retire later. Women and non-White respondents had higher likelihoods of burnout on univariate analysis (OR = 1.75, 95% CI, 1.06-2.94, P = .026 and OR = 1.82, 95% CI, 1.08-3.04, P = .017, respectively), and 25.1% of all respondents felt socially isolated. In addition, both changes in retirement planning and future occupational planning were strongly associated with total job satisfaction scores (both P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the personal and professional lives of pediatric anesthesiologists, albeit not equally, as women and non-Whites have been disproportionately impacted. The pandemic has significantly affected personal finances, home responsibilities, and retirement planning; reduced clinical and academic practice time and responsibilities; and increased feelings of social isolation, stress, burnout, and depression/anxiety.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia/psychology , Anesthesiologists/psychology , Burnout, Professional/psychology , COVID-19/psychology , Pediatrics , Surveys and Questionnaires , Adult , Anesthesia/trends , Anesthesiologists/trends , Burnout, Professional/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Job Satisfaction , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Pediatrics/trends , Retirement/trends , Societies, Medical/trends
7.
J Infect Dev Ctries ; 15(12): 1816-1824, 2021 12 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1635712

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: During the second wave of the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic, Malaysia reported several COVID-19 clusters related to healthcare workers. Thus, addressing and understanding the risk of exposure in healthcare workers is important to prevent future infection and reduce secondary COVID-19 transmission within the healthcare settings. In this study, we aim to assess exposure and prevention practices against COVID-19 among healthcare workers at the Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz, a university teaching hospital based in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. METHODOLOGY: A total of 571 healthcare workers at COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 wards as well as the emergency department and laboratory staff at COVID-19 testing labs were recruited. The presence of novel human coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and IgM/IgG antibodies were confirmed in all healthcare workers. The healthcare workers responded to an online Google Forms questionnaire that evaluates demographic information and comorbidities, exposure and adherence to infection prevention and control measures against COVID-19. Descriptive analysis was performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences 24.0. RESULTS: Three healthcare workers (0.5%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, while the remaining 568 (99.5%) were negative. All were negative for IgM and IgG antibodies during recruitment (day 1) and follow-up (day 15). More than 90% of the healthcare workers followed infection prevention and control practices recommendations regardless of whether they have been exposed to occupational risk for COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: The healthcare workers' high level of adherence to infection prevention practices at this hospital helped reduce and minimize their occupational exposure to COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control/standards , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Adult , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Testing/statistics & numerical data , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Malaysia/epidemiology , Male , Occupational Exposure/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 24490, 2021 12 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1594104

ABSTRACT

During the first wave of Covid-19 infections in Germany in April 2020, clinics reported a shortage of filtering face masks with aerosol retention> 94% (FFP2 & 3, KN95, N95). Companies all over the world increased their production capacities, but quality control of once-certified materials and masks came up short. To help identify falsely labeled masks and ensure safe protection equipment, we tested 101 different batches of masks in 993 measurements with a self-made setup based on DIN standards. An aerosol generator provided a NaCl test aerosol which was applied to the mask. A laser aerosol spectrometer measured the aerosol concentration in a range from 90 to 500 nm to quantify the masks' retention. Of 101 tested mask batches, only 31 batches kept what their label promised. Especially in the initial phase of the pandemic in Germany, we observed fluctuating mask qualities. Many batches show very high variability in aerosol retention. In addition, by measuring with a laser aerosol spectrometer, we were able to show that not all masks filter small and large particles equally well. In this study we demonstrate how important internal and independent quality controls are, especially in times of need and shortage of personal protection equipment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Masks/statistics & numerical data , Aerosols , Filtration/instrumentation , Germany , Humans , Masks/standards , Masks/trends , N95 Respirators/standards , N95 Respirators/statistics & numerical data , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Quality Control , Respiratory Protective Devices/standards , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity
10.
PLoS One ; 16(3): e0247575, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1573727

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to widespread shortages of N95 respirators and other personal protective equipment (PPE). An effective, reusable, locally-manufactured respirator can mitigate this problem. We describe the development, manufacture, and preliminary testing of an open-hardware-licensed device, the "simple silicone mask" (SSM). METHODS: A multidisciplinary team developed a reusable silicone half facepiece respirator over 9 prototype iterations. The manufacturing process consisted of 3D printing and silicone casting. Prototypes were assessed for comfort and breathability. Filtration was assessed by user seal checks and quantitative fit-testing according to CSA Z94.4-18. RESULTS: The respirator originally included a cartridge for holding filter material; this was modified to connect to standard heat-moisture exchange (HME) filters (N95 or greater) after the cartridge showed poor filtration performance due to flow acceleration around the filter edges, which was exacerbated by high filter resistance. All 8 HME-based iterations provided an adequate seal by user seal checks and achieved a pass rate of 87.5% (N = 8) on quantitative testing, with all failures occurring in the first iteration. The overall median fit-factor was 1662 (100 = pass). Estimated unit cost for a production run of 1000 using distributed manufacturing techniques is CAD $15 in materials and 20 minutes of labor. CONCLUSION: Small-scale manufacturing of an effective, reusable N95 respirator during a pandemic is feasible and cost-effective. Required quantities of reusables are more predictable and less vulnerable to supply chain disruption than disposables. With further evaluation, such devices may be an alternative to disposable respirators during public health emergencies. The respirator described above is an investigational device and requires further evaluation and regulatory requirements before clinical deployment. The authors and affiliates do not endorse the use of this device at present.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Equipment Design/instrumentation , Filtration/instrumentation , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment , Respiratory Protective Devices , Ventilators, Mechanical , Equipment Reuse , Face , Humans , Materials Testing/instrumentation , N95 Respirators , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Printing, Three-Dimensional/instrumentation , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity
13.
Anesthesiology ; 135(6): 951-962, 2021 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1546049

ABSTRACT

Respiratory viruses are transmitted via respiratory particles that are emitted when people breath, speak, cough, or sneeze. These particles span the size spectrum from visible droplets to airborne particles of hundreds of nanometers. Barrier face coverings ("cloth masks") and surgical masks are loose-fitting and provide limited protection from airborne particles since air passes around the edges of the mask as well as through the filtering material. Respirators, which fit tightly to the face, provide more effective respiratory protection. Although healthcare workers have relied primarily on disposable filtering facepiece respirators (such as N95) during the COVID-19 pandemic, reusable elastomeric respirators have significant potential advantages for the COVID-19 and future respiratory virus pandemics. However, currently available elastomeric respirators were not designed primarily for healthcare or pandemic use and require further development to improve their suitability for this application. The authors believe that the development, implementation, and stockpiling of improved elastomeric respirators should be an international public health priority.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Elastomers/standards , Equipment Design/standards , Health Personnel/standards , Occupational Exposure/standards , Ventilators, Mechanical/standards , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Equipment Design/methods , Equipment Reuse/standards , Humans , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control
15.
ANZ J Surg ; 92(1-2): 57-61, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1494594

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Surgical smoke or plume is produced by a variety of surgical coagulators and dissectors. A number of jurisdictions have recently introduced policies to reduce the associated occupational health risks including WorkSafe Victoria and New South Wales Health. METHOD: This paper is a narrative review of potential risks, including any associated with COVID-19, and options for mitigation. RESULTS: Surgical smoke or plume contains potentially toxic chemicals, some of which are carcinogens. Plume may also contain live virus, notably Human Papilloma and Hepatitis B, though any possible viral transmission is limited to a few case reports. Despite identifying COVID-19 ribonucleic acid fragments in various body tissues and fluids there are no current reports of COVID-19 transmission. Although plume is rapidly removed from the atmosphere in modern operating rooms, it is still inhaled by the operative team. Mitigation should include ensuring diathermy devices have evacuators while plume extraction should be standard for laparoscopic procedures. Consideration needs to be given to the potential to compromise the operating field of view, or the noise of the extractor impairing communication. There is an increasing range of suitable products on the market. The future includes pendant systems built into the operating room. CONCLUSION: The potential risks associated with surgical plume cannot be ignored. Health services should invest in plume extraction devices with a view to protecting their staff. The conduct of the operation should not be compromised by the devices chosen. Future operating theatres need to be designed to minimize exposure to plume.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Occupational Exposure , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Operating Rooms , SARS-CoV-2 , Smoke/adverse effects
16.
Ann Work Expo Health ; 66(4): 495-509, 2022 Apr 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1475768

ABSTRACT

In the current pandemic context of COVID-19, people wear different types of masks, particularly in their workplace, to limit the spread of the virus. Depending on their activity and work environment, employees are required to wear community face coverings, cloth masks with a transparent windows, surgical masks, reusable masks, or respirators. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficiency as source control of these masks, i.e., when worn to protect the environment from the spread of particles emitted by the wearer. An experimental test bench including a dummy head and a breathing simulator associated with a DEHS droplet generator emitting 1 or 3 µm particles in the exhaled stream is used. Source control efficiency is calculated from the total flux of particles emitted in the test section without and with a mask. Seventeen models of masks are tested. Three breathing rate conditions were studied: from rest to heavy breathing, with average rates of 13, 27, and 45 L/min. Source control efficiencies vary from one mask to another. Among community face coverings (seven models) the values ranged from 15.6 to 33.8% for a medium intensity breath. The efficiencies of surgical masks (three models) ranged from 17.4 to 28.3% for the same breathing cycle. The community face coverings and the disposable surgical masks present equivalent values of source control efficiency, respectively, 25.9 and 24.1% at 1 µm and 31.5 and 23.2% at 3 µm. The respirators show higher source control efficiency than the other types of masks (76.7% at 1 µm and 82.5% at 3 µm). The statistical analysis of the data shows no effect of the breathing flow rate and an interaction effect between mask type and particle size. No differences in source control were found for the two particle sizes or the different experimental breathing rates for the respirators and the surgical masks. But the community face coverings and the cloth masks with transparent window present a source control efficiency which increases with the particle size. Varying levels of efficiency were measured with higher source control for respirators than for other types of masks. In the context of a respiratory protection programme, they can provide an effective barrier to the spread of the virus. But these results show also that no mask can stop all the particles emitted by its wearer. Regardless of the type of mask, other barrier measures (ventilation, social distancing, and hygiene) are then necessary.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Occupational Exposure , Aerosols , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Masks , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control
17.
Pan Afr Med J ; 39: 283, 2021.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1472501

ABSTRACT

Self-denial and sense of duty are fundamental ethical principles in health care. Since the outbreak of health crisis, healthcare workers have been the first bulwark against the spread of coronavirus, and therefore, the occupational category at higher risk of contamination. In this regard, in a statement dated 23 March 2020, the World Health Organization published a guidance regarding the management of the disease caused by Covid-19 in health workers, but also in workers employed in all sectors exposed to the risk of contamination. In Morocco, the Ministry of Health published on April 6, on its official website, a condolence message to the families of the first two doctors died following contraction of coronavirus, while specifying that coronavirus infection was not due to the exercise of their professional functions. The Minister of Labor and Professional Integration recently appointed an internal committee to undertake a reflection on this issue. At present, given Morocco's law, what are the chances to categorize coronavirus as an occupational disease?


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Personnel/psychology , Occupational Diseases/prevention & control , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Occupational Health , Pandemics/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Morocco/epidemiology , Personal Protective Equipment , SARS-CoV-2
18.
Addict Sci Clin Pract ; 16(1): 49, 2021 07 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1456010

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has created a crisis in access to addiction treatment. Programs with residential components have been particularly impacted as they try to keep infection from spreading in facilities and contributing to further community spread of the virus. This crisis highlights the ongoing daily trade-offs that organizations must weigh as they balance the risks and benefits of individual patients with those of the group of patients, staff and the community they serve. MAIN BODY: The COVID-19 pandemic has forced provider organizations to make individual facility level decisions about how to manage patients who are COVID-19 positive while protecting other patients, staff and the community. While guidance documents from federal, state, and trade groups aimed to support such decision making, they often lagged pandemic dynamics, and provided too little detail to translate into front line decision making. In the context of incomplete knowledge to make informed decisions, we present a way to integrate guidelines and local data into the decision process and discuss the ethical dilemmas faced by provider organizations in preventing infections and responding to COVID positive patients or staff. CONCLUSION AND COMMENTARY: Provider organizations need decision support on managing the risk of COVID-19 positive patients in their milieu. While useful, guidance documents may not be capable of providing support with the nuance that local data and simulation modeling may be able to provide.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Residential Treatment/organization & administration , Substance-Related Disorders/complications , Substance-Related Disorders/rehabilitation , Attitude of Health Personnel , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Program Evaluation , Risk Management
19.
ANZ J Surg ; 92(1-2): 51-56, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1455506

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The widespread adoption of minimally invasive surgery and increased use of intra-operative fluoroscopy places surgeons and trainees at risk of cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Unfortunately, there is limited published data specific to surgeons on the potential health implications. This study aims to review current literature regarding the hazards of cumulative radiation exposure among operating theatre staff. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted of four databases for studies reporting on cumulative intra-operative radiation exposure for operating theatre staff and the hazards associated with prolonged and frequent use. References from relevant studies were screened for additional texts. English language studies, controlled trials and cross-sectional studies were included. Abstracts and full-text studies were assessed for relevance and eligibility independently by two authors using Covidence. RESULTS: Six studies were included, with cancer being the most commonly reported long-term health hazard possibly associated with cumulative radiation exposure. A 1.85 fold greater prevalence of all cancers and 2.9 fold greater prevalence of breast cancer was reported amongst female orthopaedic surgeons compared to a sex- and age-adjusted population, but the results were not replicated amongst other surgical specialties. Multiple limitations of quantifying health risks of intra-operative radiation exposure were identified, including identifying a dose-effect relationship and confounders such as nulliparity and maternal age. CONCLUSION: This article highlights the lack of robust evidence regarding the potential hazards of cumulative occupational intra-operative radiation exposure. This study demonstrates the importance of developing standardised national radiation safety protocols for surgical colleges and subspecialties to minimise risks to operating theatre staff.


Subject(s)
Occupational Exposure , Radiation Exposure , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Fluoroscopy , Humans , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Operating Rooms
20.
Postgrad Med J ; 98(1156): 131-137, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1452953

ABSTRACT

Lower respiratory infections are often caused or precipitated by viruses and are a leading cause of global morbidity and mortality. Mutations in these viral genomes can produce highly infectious strains that transmit across species and have the potential to initiate epidemic, or pandemic, human viral respiratory disease. Transmission between humans primarily occurs via the airborne route and is accelerated by our increasingly interconnected and globalised society. To this date, there have been four major human viral respiratory outbreaks in the 21st century. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at particular risk during respiratory epidemics or pandemics. This is due to crowded working environments where social distancing, or wearing respiratory personal protective equipment for prolonged periods, might prove difficult, or performing medical procedures that increase exposure to virus-laden aerosols, or bodily fluids. This review aims to summarise the evidence and approaches to occupational risk and protection of HCWs during epidemic or pandemic respiratory viral disease.


Subject(s)
Communicable Diseases , Health Personnel/psychology , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment , Respiratory Tract Infections/prevention & control , Virus Diseases/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , Occupational Health , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , Respiratory Tract Infections/virology , Virus Diseases/transmission , Workplace
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL