A review of the selection process and decontamination methods with the use of face shields in UV phototherapy during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Targeted ultraviolet (UV) phototherapy has been used in the management of a wide variety of dermatological clinical conditions including moderate to severe psoriasis unresponsive to topical therapies, vitiligo, severe atopic dermatitis and lymphoproliferative disorders. To date there are no uniform, standardised guidelines for the selection and decontamination process for UV personal protective equipment (PPE) and facial shields used in phototherapy. In the current climate, Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, standards regarding all decontamination and disinfection processes are under significant scrutiny. In terms of the UV-PPE and facial shields used in phototherapy, careful disinfection procedures need to be implemented to ensure that the decontamination practice is effective enough to neutralise the virulent virus whilst maintaining maximal protection to the user from UV-rays and safeguard the equipment from damage during the cleaning process. The aim of this report is to provide an evidence based review of the current and international practice standards guiding the selection, use and decontamination processes of UV facial shields in phototherapy. The complications and concerns that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on this practice is highlighted. As such, we performed a comprehensive evaluation of the literature to provide recommendations as to the most effective, time efficient and safest practices for disinfection and decontamination of UV facial shields used in phototherapy during these unprecedented times.

Theoretical design of an absorption hologram-based sensor for dose quantification in daylight photodynamic therapy.

Daylight photodynamic therapy (D-PDT) is an effective and almost painless treatment for many skin conditions, where successful treatment relies on daylight activation of a topical photosensitizer. Optimization of D-PDT requires accurate assessment of light dose received. There is a requirement for a small-area sensor that can be placed adjacent to the treatment site to facilitate accurate dose quantification. Here, a novel, to the best of our knowledge, configuration for a D-PDT dose sensor, consisting of a holographic absorption grating fabricated in a photosensitive film, is presented. Theoretical modeling of the sensor's response (i.e., change in grating diffraction efficiency due to change in grating absorption modulation, α1, on exposure to daylight) was conducted using Kogelnik's coupled-wave theory. The influence of the different grating parameters (initial film absorption, thickness, spatial frequency, and reconstruction wavelength) on the sensor response was examined and revealed that the initial absorption and grating thickness values have a large impact on both the magnitude and rate of the D-PDT sensor response. The optimum design for an absorption grating-based D-PDT sensor is described.

Quantifying the radiant exposure and effective dose in patients treated for actinic keratoses with topical photodynamic therapy using daylight and LED white light.

Daylight photodynamic therapy (dl-PDT) is as effective as conventional PDT (c-PDT) for treating actinic keratoses but has the advantage of reducing patient discomfort significantly. Topical dl-PDT and white light-PDT (wl-PDT) differ from c-PDT by way of light sources and methodology. We measured the variables associated with light dose delivery to skin surface and influence of geometry using a radiometer, a spectral radiometer and an illuminance meter. The associated errors of the measurement methods were assessed. The spectral and spatial distribution of the radiant energy from the LED white light source was evaluated in order to define the maximum treatment area, setup and treatment protocol for wl-PDT. We compared the data with two red LED light sources we use for c-PDT. The calculated effective light dose is the product of the normalised absorption spectrum of the photosensitizer, protoporphyrin IX (PpIX), the irradiance spectrum and the treatment time. The effective light dose from daylight ranged from 3 ± 0.4 to 44 ± 6 J cm-2due to varying weather conditions. The effective light dose for wl-PDT was reproducible for treatments but it varied across the treatment area between 4 ± 0.1 J cm-2 at the edge and 9 ± 0.1 J cm-2 centrally. The effective light dose for the red waveband (615-645 nm) was 0.42 ± 0.05 J cm-2 on a clear day, 0.05 ± 0.01 J cm-2 on an overcast day and 0.9 ± 0.01 J cm-2 using the white light. This compares with 0.95 ± 0.01 and 0.84 ± 0.01 J cm-2 for c-PDT devices. Estimated errors associated with indirect determination of daylight effective light dose were very significant, particularly for effective light doses less than 5 J cm-2 (up to 83% for irradiance calculations). The primary source of error is in establishment of the relationship between irradiance or illuminance and effective dose. Use of the O'Mahoney model is recommended using a calibrated logging illuminance meter with the detector in the plane of the treatment area.