Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 10(1): 159, 2021 11 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1505725

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the COVID-19 pandemic context, a massive shortage of personal protective equipment occurred. To increase the available stocks, several countries appealed for donations from individuals or industries. While national and international standards to evaluate personal protective equipment exist, none of the previous research studied how to evaluate personal protective equipment coming from donations to healthcare establishments. Our aim was to evaluate the quality and possible use of the personal protective equipment donations delivered to our health care establishment in order to avoid a shortage and to protect health care workers throughout the COVID-19 crisis. METHODS: Our intervention focused on evaluation of the quality of donations for medical use through creation of a set of assessment criteria and analysis of the economic impact of these donations. RESULTS: Between 20th March 2020 and 11th May 2020, we received 239 donations including respirators, gloves, coveralls, face masks, gowns, hats, overshoes, alcohol-based hand rubs, face shields, goggles and aprons. A total of 448,666 (86.3%) products out of the 519,618 initially received were validated and distributed in health care units, equivalent to 126 (52.7%) donations out of the 239 received. The budgetary value of the validated donations was 32,872 euros according to the pre COVID-19 prices and 122,178 euros according to the current COVID-19 prices, representing an increase of 371.7%. CONCLUSIONS: By ensuring a constant influx of personal protective equipment and proper stock management, shortages were avoided. Procurement and distribution of controlled and validated personal protective equipment is the key to providing quality care while guaranteeing health care worker safety.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Eye Protective Devices/supply & distribution , Health Personnel/psychology , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Masks/supply & distribution , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , Protective Clothing/supply & distribution , Safety Management , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Infection Control , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , Protective Clothing/statistics & numerical data , Quality Improvement , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Am J Nurs ; 121(1): 48-54, 2021 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-990816

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: In March 2020, in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the executive leadership of an academic medical center in Atlanta tasked an interprofessional quality improvement (QI) team with identifying ways to improve staff and patient safety while caring for patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection. Additional goals of the initiative were to improve workflow efficiency by reducing the amount of time spent donning and doffing personal protective equipment (PPE) and to conserve PPE, which could be in short supply in a prolonged pandemic. The QI team developed a "warm zone model" that allowed staff members to wear the same mask, eye protection, and gown while moving between the rooms of patients who had tested positive for COVID-19. The risk of self-contamination while doffing PPE is well documented. Staff members were trained to conserve PPE and to properly change gloves and perform hand hygiene between exiting and entering patients' rooms. The warm zone model allowed multidisciplinary team members to reduce the times they donned and doffed PPE per shift while maintaining or increasing the times they entered and exited patients' rooms. Staff members believed that the model improved workflow and teamwork while maintaining staff members' personal safety. Daily gown use decreased on the acute care unit where the model was employed, helping to preserve PPE supplies. Once the model was proven successful in acute care, it was modified and instituted on several critical care COVID-19 cohort units.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Critical Care/organization & administration , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Models, Organizational , Personal Protective Equipment , Gloves, Protective/statistics & numerical data , Gloves, Protective/supply & distribution , Humans , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , Protective Clothing/statistics & numerical data , Protective Clothing/supply & distribution , United States
3.
Front Public Health ; 8: 590275, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-983747

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has laid bare the inadequacy of the U.S. healthcare system to deliver timely and resilient care. According to the American Hospital Association, the pandemic has created a $202 billion loss across the healthcare industry, forcing health care systems to lay off workers and making hospitals scramble to minimize supply chain costs. However, as the demand for personal protective equipment (PPE) grows, hospitals have sacrificed sustainable solutions for disposable options that, although convenient, will exacerbate supply strains, financial burden, and waste. We advocate for reusable gowns as a means to lower health care costs, address climate change, and improve resilience while preserving the safety of health care workers. Reusable gowns' polyester material provides comparable capacity to reduce microbial cross-transmission and liquid penetration. In addition, previous hospitals have reported a 50% cost reduction in gown expenditures after adopting reusable gowns; given the current 2000% price increase in isolation gowns during COVID-19, reusable gown use will build both healthcare resilience and security from price fluctuations. Finally, with the United States' medical waste stream worsening, reusable isolation gowns show promising reductions in energy and water use, solid waste, and carbon footprint. The gowns are shown to withstand laundering 75-100 times in contrast to the single-use disposable gown. The circumstances of the pandemic forewarn the need to shift our single-use PPE practices to standardized reusable applications. Ultimately, sustainable forms of protective equipment can help us prepare for future crises that challenge the resilience of the healthcare system.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Disposable Equipment/economics , Equipment Reuse/economics , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Infection Control/economics , Pandemics/prevention & control , Protective Clothing/economics , Adult , Disposable Equipment/statistics & numerical data , Equipment Reuse/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Infection Control/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Exposure/economics , Occupational Exposure/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Protective Clothing/statistics & numerical data , United States
4.
Eur J Emerg Med ; 28(3): 202-209, 2021 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-892115

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Healthcare personnel working in the emergency department (ED) is at risk of acquiring severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-Cov-2). So far, it is unknown if the reported variety in infection rates among healthcare personnel is related to the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) or other factors. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the association between PPE use and SARS-CoV-2 infections among ED personnel in the Netherlands. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A nationwide survey, consisting of 42 questions about PPE-usage, ED layout - and workflow and SARS-CoV-2 infection rates of permanent ED staff, was sent to members of the Dutch Society of Emergency Physicians. Members were asked to fill out one survey on behalf of the ED of their hospital. The association between PPE use and the infection rate was investigated using univariable and multivariable regression analyses, adjusting for potential confounders. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was the incidence of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections among permanent ED staff between 1 March and 15 May 2020. RESULTS: Surveys were sent to 64 EDs of which 45 responded (70.3%). In total, 164 ED staff workers [5.1 (3.2-7.0)%] tested positive for COVID-19 during the study period compared to 0.087% of the general population. There was significant clustering of infected ED staff in some hospitals (range: 0-23 infection). In 13 hospitals, an FFP2 (filtering facepiece particles >94% aerosol filtration) mask or equivalent and eye protection was worn for all contacts with patients with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 during the whole study period. The unadjusted staff infection rate was higher in these hospitals [7.3 (3.4-11.1) vs. 4.0 (1.9-6.1)%, absolute difference + 3.3%]. Hospital staff testing policy was identified as a potential confounder of the relation between PPE use and confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections (collinearity statistic 0.95). After adjusting for hospital testing policy, type of PPE was not associated with incidence of COVID 19 infections among ED staff (P = 0.40). CONCLUSION: In this cross-sectional study, the use of high-level PPE (FFP2 or equivalent and eye protection) by ED personnel during all contacts with patients with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 does not seem to be associated with a lower infection rate of ED staff compared to lower level PPE use. Attention should be paid to ED layout and social distancing to prevent cross-contamination of ED personnel.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Gloves, Protective/statistics & numerical data , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Infection Control/methods , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Male , Netherlands , Protective Clothing/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Protective Devices/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
5.
Med Leg J ; 88(1_suppl): 43-46, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-680501

ABSTRACT

Use of appropriate personal protective equipment is essential for healthcare workers when dealing with patients who have tested positive or are suspected of having Covid-19. Personal protective equipment is uncomfortable at best. In hot countries (like India) or in a hot place of work, its wearers are at a high risk of heat-related illnesses. Once in personal protective equipment a healthcare worker can remain in it for at least 6 h at a stretch. In summer when it is hot and humid, personal protective equipment can cause wearer dehydration, heat exhaustion or heat fatigue. In a severe form, this can result in heat stroke and a collapse while on duty. Preventive measures are needed to protect healthcare workers. This review aims to highlight the efficacy and applicability of personal cooling garments.


Subject(s)
Heat Stress Disorders/prevention & control , Hot Temperature , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , Body Temperature Regulation/physiology , Humans , India , Protective Clothing/statistics & numerical data , Tropical Climate
6.
J Korean Med Sci ; 35(23): e220, 2020 Jun 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-598890

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The absence of effective antiviral medications and vaccines increased the focus on non-pharmaceutical preventive behaviors for mitigating against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. To examine the current status of non-pharmaceutical preventive behaviors practiced during the COVID-19 outbreak and factors affecting behavioral activities, we compared to the 2015 Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) outbreak in Korea. METHODS: This was a serial cross-sectional population-based study in Korea with four surveys conducted on June 2 and 25, 2015 (MERS-CoV surveys), and February 4, and April 2, 2020 (COVID-19 surveys). Of 25,711 participants selected using random digit dialing numbers, 4,011 participants (aged ≥ 18 years) were successfully interviewed, for the 2020 COVID-19 (n = 2,002) and 2015 MERS-CoV (n = 2,009) epidemics were included. Participants were selected post-stratification by sex, age, and province. The total number of weighted cases in this survey equaled the total number of unweighted cases at the national level. We measured the levels of preventive behaviors (social distancing [avoiding physical contact with others]), and practicing transmission-reducing behaviors such as wearing face mask and handwashing. RESULTS: Between the surveys, respondents who reported practicing social distancing increased from 41.9%-58.2% (MERS-CoV) to 83.4%-92.3% (COVID-19). The response rate for the four surveys ranged between 13.7% and 17.7%. Practicing transmission-reducing behaviors (wearing face masks and handwashing) at least once during COVID-19 (78.8%, 80.2%) also increased compared to that during MERS-CoV (15.5%, 60.3%). The higher affective risk perception groups were more likely to practice transmission-reducing measures (adjusted odds ratio, 3.24-4.81; 95 confidence interval, 1.76-6.96) during both COVID-19 and MERS-CoV. CONCLUSION: The study findings suggest markedly increased proportions of non-pharmaceutical behavioral practices evenly across all subgroups during the two different novel virus outbreaks in Korea. Strategic interventions are needed to attempt based on preventive behavior works.


Subject(s)
Communicable Disease Control , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Hand Disinfection/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Protective Clothing/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus , Pandemics/prevention & control , Primary Prevention/methods , Republic of Korea/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
7.
J Bone Joint Surg Am ; 102(10): 847-854, 2020 05 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-275825

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) broke out in Wuhan, the People's Republic of China, in December 2019 and now is a pandemic all around the world. Some orthopaedic surgeons in Wuhan were infected with COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a survey to identify the orthopaedic surgeons who were infected with COVID-19 in Wuhan. A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to collect information such as social demographic variables, clinical manifestations, exposure history, awareness of the outbreak, infection control training provided by hospitals, and individual protection practices. To further explore the possible risk factors at the individual level, a 1:2 matched case-control study was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 26 orthopaedic surgeons from 8 hospitals in Wuhan were identified as having COVID-19. The incidence in each hospital varied from 1.5% to 20.7%. The onset of symptoms was from January 13 to February 5, 2020, and peaked on January 23, 8 days prior to the peak of the public epidemic. The suspected sites of exposure were general wards (79.2%), public places at the hospital (20.8%), operating rooms (12.5%), the intensive care unit (4.2%), and the outpatient clinic (4.2%). There was transmission from these doctors to others in 25% of cases, including to family members (20.8%), to colleagues (4.2%), to patients (4.2%), and to friends (4.2%). Participation in real-time training on prevention measures was found to have a protective effect against COVID-19 (odds ratio [OR], 0.12). Not wearing an N95 respirator was found to be a risk factor (OR, 5.20 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.09 to 25.00]). Wearing respirators or masks all of the time was found to be protective (OR, 0.15). Severe fatigue was found to be a risk factor (OR, 4 [95% CI, 1 to 16]) for infection with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Orthopaedic surgeons are at risk during the COVID-19 pandemic. Common places of work could be contaminated. Orthopaedic surgeons have to be more vigilant and take more precautions to avoid infection with COVID-19. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Orthopedic Surgeons/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Adult , COVID-19 , Case-Control Studies , China/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Fatigue/complications , Female , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Orthopedic Surgeons/education , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Primary Prevention/education , Protective Clothing/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...