Evaluation of Capillary Blood Gases in Medical Personnel Caring for Patients Isolated Due to SARS-CoV-2 in Intensive Care Units before and after Using Enhanced Filtration Masks: A Prospective Cohort Study.

The dynamically changing epidemiological situation caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus is associated with the increased burden and fatigue of medical personnel. The aim of the study was to evaluate: (1) oxygen and carbon dioxide blood pressure and saturation levels in medical personnel caring for patients isolated due to SARS-CoV-2 in ICUs; (2) adverse symptoms reported by medical personnel after leaving the isolation zone. DESIGN: A Prospective Cohort Study. METHODS: The project was implemented in the first quarter of 2021. Medical personnel working with patients isolated due to SARS-CoV-2 in the ICU of three hospitals were eligible for the study. The participants of the study were subjected to two analyses of capillary blood by a laboratory diagnostician. RESULTS: In the studied group of medical personnel (n = 110) using FFP2/FFP3 masks, no significant differences (p > 0.05) were found between the parameters of geometric examination performed before and after leaving the isolation ward of the hospital. After working in the isolation ward, nurses reported malaise (somnolence, fatigue, sweating, dizziness) more often than paramedics (44% vs. 9%; p = 0.00002). The risk of ill-being in nurses was approximately nine times higher than in paramedics (OR = 8.6; Cl 95%: 2.7 to 26.8) and increased with the age of the subjects (OR = 1.05; Cl 95%: 1.01 to 1.08). CONCLUSION: FFP2/FFP3 filter masks did not worsen blood oxygenation in medical staff caring for patients isolated due to SARS-CoV-2 in the ICU. The presence of subjective symptoms such as fatigue may be due to lack of adequate hydration.

Comparative Analysis of the Effectiveness of Performing Advanced Resuscitation Procedures Undertaken by Two- and Three- Person Basic Medical Rescue Teams in Adults under Simulated Conditions.

(1) Objective: Paramedics as a profession are a pillar of the State Medical Rescue system. The basic difference between a specialist and a basic team is the composition of members. The aim of the study was to benchmark the effectiveness of performing advanced resuscitation procedures undertaken by two- and three-person basic emergency medical teams in adults under simulated conditions. (2) Design: The research was observational. 200 two- and three-people basic emergency medical teams were analyzed during advanced resuscitation procedures, ALS (Advanced Life Support) in adults under simulated conditions. (3) Method: The study was carried out among professionally active and certified paramedics. It lasted over two years. The study took place under simulated conditions using prepared scenarios. (4) Results: In total, 463 people took part in the study. The analysis of the survey results indicates that the efficiency of three-person teams is superior to the activities performed by two-person teams. Three-person teams were quicker to perform rescue actions than two-person teams. The two-person teams were much quicker to assess the condition of victims than the three-person teams. The three-person teams were more likely to check an open airway. The three-person teams were more efficient in assessing the heart rhythm and current condition of victims. It was demonstrated that three-person teams were more effective during electrotherapy. The analysis demonstrated that three-person teams were significantly faster and more efficient in chest compressions. Three-person teams were less likely to use emergency airway techniques than two-person teams. The results indicate that three-person teams administered the first dose of adrenaline significantly faster than two-person teams. For the "call for help", the three-person teams were found to be more effective. (5) Conclusion: Paramedics in three-person teams work more effectively, make a proper assessment of heart rhythm and monitor when taking advanced actions. The quality of ventilation and BLS in both groups studied is insufficient. Numerous errors have been observed in two-person teams during pharmacotherapy.