Health care workers' experience of personal protective equipment use and associated adverse effects during the COVID-19 pandemic response in Singapore.

AIM: One of the greatest challenges in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic is preventing staff exposure and infection by ensuring consistent and effective use of personal protective equipment (PPE). This study explored health care workers' experience of prolonged PPE use in clinical practice settings and their concerns regarding PPE supply, effectiveness and training needs. DESIGN: A descriptive cross-sectional design was adopted in this study. METHODS: Health care workers (N = 592) from an acute care hospital completed an online survey from July to September 2020 assessing: (i) usage frequencies, side effects and interference with patient care; and (ii) perceptions of access to PPE, likelihood of exposure to infection and adequacy of PPE training. RESULTS: PPE-related side effects were reported by 319 (53.8%) participants, the majority being nurses (88.4%) and those working in high-risk areas such as the emergency department (39.5%), respiratory wards (acute 22.3% and non-acute 23.8%) and COVID-19 isolation ward (13.8%). The average time wearing PPE per shift was 6.8 h (SD 0.39). The most commonly reported symptoms were from donning N95 masks and included: pressure injuries (45.5%), mask-induced acne (40.4%) and burning/pain (24.5%). Some 31.3% expressed that PPE-related side effects had negatively affected their work. The odds of having PPE-associated side effects was higher in women (OR 2.10, 95% CI [1.29-03.42], p = .003) and those working in high-risk wards (OR 3.12, 95% CI [2.17-4.60], p < .001]. Most (90.1%) agreed that PPE supplies were readily available, sufficient for all (86.1%) and there was sufficient training in correct PPE use (93.6%). Only 13.7% of participants reported being 'highly confident' of overall PPE protection. CONCLUSIONS: Prevention and management of PPE-related adverse effects is vital to: preserve the integrity of PPE, improve adherence and minimize viral transmission. IMPACT: The high incidence of PPE-associated pressure injuries and perception that PPE use can interfere with clinical care should inform future development of PPE products, and strategies to better equip health care workers to prevent and manage PPE-related side effects.

Evaluating knowledge and perception of antimicrobial stewardship among nurses in an acute care hospital.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial stewardship programs are essential to reduce the risks of antimicrobial resistance. METHODS: A cross sectional survey was used to evaluate nurses' knowledge and perceptions of antimicrobial stewardship. RESULTS: Of 241 nurses recruited, 22.9% reported good knowledge of antimicrobial stewardship. Nurses agreed that ensuring appropriate antimicrobial use, hygiene for preparation, administration and disposal of antibiotics, as well as educating colleagues, patients and public were vital. Many felt that to reduce the impact of antimicrobial resistance, AMS should be included in the undergraduate nursing curriculum. CONCLUSIONS: Improving the awareness of and education on AMS and AMR among nurses is an essential element in infection and prevention control.

Evaluation of infection prevention and control preparedness in acute care nurses: Factors influencing adherence to standard precautions.

BACKGROUND: It is essential to identify factors that affect adherence to standard precautions, which could increase risk of occupational exposure to pathogens. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted. Nurses (n = 241) in an acute care hospital completed the survey including the Factors Influencing Adherence to Standard Precautions Scale (FIASPS) (total possible scores in each domain ranged from 5 to 25) and the Compliance with Standard Precautions Scale (CSPS) (total possible scores ranged from 0 to 20). RESULTS: Results showed moderate influence of the judgement (mean = 14.04, SD = 4.04), leadership (M = 14.58, SD 3.78), and culture/practice (M = 12.61, SD = 3.18) factors; high score on contextual cues (M = 15.77, SD = 3.60); and low score on justification (M = 5.76, SD = 4.57). The overall mean CSPS score was 76.68% (SD 13.82). There was a significant negative relationship between justification for non-use of standard precautions and nurses' adherence with standard precautions (r = -0.24, p < 0.001). A significant positive relationship was reported between the leadership factor (r = 0.25, p < 0.001), cultural practice factor in FIASPS (r = 0.24, p < 0.001) and nurse' adherence with standard precautions. CONCLUSION: Nurses would benefit from regular training sessions to reiterate the infection control guidelines and the need to abide to them. Encouraging nurses to be role models serves to increase the adherence to SPs in their colleagues. Organization should continue with strict enforcement of policies with monitoring.