Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

28 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Effectiveness of personal protective equipment and oseltamivir prophylaxis during avian influenza A (H7N7) epidemic, the Netherlands, 2003.

ABSTRACT: We analyzed the effectiveness of personal protective equipment and oseltamivir use during the 2003 avian influenza A (H7N7) epidemic in the Netherlands by linking databases containing information about farm visits, human infections, and use of oseltamivir and personal protective equipment. Using a stringent case definition, based on self-reported conjunctivitis combined with a positive hemagglutination-inhibition assay, we found that prophylactic treatment with oseltamivir significantly reduced the risk for infection per farm visit from 0.145 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.078-0.233) to 0.031 (95% CI 0.008-0.073). The protective effect was ≈79% (95% CI 40%-97%). These results are comparable with the reported effect of prophylactic treatment with oseltamivir on human seasonal influenza. No significant protective effect was found for use of respirators or safety glasses, possibly because of limitations of the data.

SUBMITTER: te Beest DE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3294382 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Estimating the per-contact probability of infection by highly pathogenic avian influenza (H7N7) virus during the 2003 epidemic in The Netherlands.

Project description:Estimates of the per-contact probability of transmission between farms of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza virus of H7N7 subtype during the 2003 epidemic in the Netherlands are important for the design of better control and biosecurity strategies. We used standardized data collected during the epidemic and a model to extract data for untraced contacts based on the daily number of infectious farms within a given distance of a susceptible farm. With these data, we used a maximum likelihood estimation approach to estimate the transmission probabilities by the individual contact types, both traced and untraced. The estimated conditional probabilities, conditional on the contact originating from an infectious farm, of virus transmission were: 0.000057 per infectious farm within 1 km per day, 0.000413 per infectious farm between 1 and 3 km per day, 0.0000895 per infectious farm between 3 and 10 km per day, 0.0011 per crisis organisation contact, 0.0414 per feed delivery contact, 0.308 per egg transport contact, 0.133 per other-professional contact and, 0.246 per rendering contact. We validate these outcomes against literature data on virus genetic sequences for outbreak farms. These estimates can be used to inform further studies on the role that improved biosecurity between contacts and/or contact frequency reduction can play in eliminating between-farm spread of the virus during future epidemics. The findings also highlight the need to; 1) understand the routes underlying the infections without traced contacts and, 2) to review whether the contact-tracing protocol is exhaustive in relation to all the farm's day-to-day activities and practices.

| S-EPMC3396644 | biostudies-literature

Personal protective equipment and risk for avian influenza (H7N3).

Project description:An outbreak of avian influenza (H7N3) among poultry resulted in laboratory-confirmed disease in 1 of 103 exposed persons. Incomplete use of personal protective equipment (PPE) was associated with conjunctivitis and influenza-like symptoms. Rigorous use of PPE by persons managing avian influenza outbreaks may reduce exposure to potentially hazardous infected poultry materials.

| S-EPMC2662632 | biostudies-literature

Pharmacological Prophylaxis and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Practices in Gynecological Cancer Surgery During COVID-19 Pandemic.

Project description:PurposeIn the absence of vaccine, proper use of personal protective equipment (PPE) is the most important strategy to protect healthcare workers against COVID-19 infection. The recommendations on pharmacological prophylaxis against COVID-19 infection are controversial. The aim of current study was to assess PPE practices during surgery on COVID-19 negative gynecological cancer patients and use of pharmacologic prophylaxis by clinicians practicing gynecologic oncology.MethodsWe disbursed a survey questionnaire through various social media platforms among clinicians practicing gynecologic oncology. The survey consisted of 37 questions divided into five subgroups evaluating demographic details, use of pharmacological prophylaxis against COVID-19, preoperative COVID-19 screening protocol, details on PPE usage and associated discomfort, if any.ResultsTwo hundred twenty oncologists from 13 countries responded to the survey. Pharmacological prophylaxis was being used by 85 (38.6%) respondents; most common agent was hydroxychloroquin (HCQ) by 24.5% respondents. Routine preoperative screening for COVID-19 was performed by 214 (97.3%) respondents. Some degree of discomfort during surgery due to PPE use was reported by 170 (77.3%) respondents, which was moderate to severe in 73 (33.2%) respondents. Most common difficulties associated with face mask/shield were problems in communication (69.5%) and breathing (58.1%). Eye protection was associated with poor visibility, fogging and headache. Unusual fatigue attributed to PPE use was experienced by 143(65%) respondents.ConclusionUse of pharmacological prophylaxis against COVID-19 is controversial and the same is reflected in our survey. Most respondents adhered to PPE use despite experiencing some physical discomfort.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40944-021-00500-4.

| S-EPMC7847240 | biostudies-literature

COVID-19 and personal protective equipment: Treatment and prevention of skin conditions related to the occupational use of personal protective equipment.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC7228687 | biostudies-literature

Personal protective equipment doffing practices of healthcare workers.

Project description:During the doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE), pathogens can be transferred from the PPE to the bodies of healthcare workers (HCWs), putting HCWs and patients at risk of exposure and infection. PPE doffing practices of HCWs who cared for patients with viral respiratory infections were observed at an acute care hospital from March 2017 to April 2018. A trained observer recorded doffing performance of HCWs inside the patient rooms using a pre-defined checklist based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guideline. Doffing practices were observed 162 times during care of 52 patients infected with respiratory viral pathogens. Out of the 52 patients, 30 were in droplet and contact isolation, 21 were in droplet isolation, and 1 was in contact isolation. Overall, 90% of observed doffing was incorrect, with respect to the doffing sequence, doffing technique, or use of appropriate PPE. Common errors were doffing gown from the front, removing face shield of the mask, and touching potentially contaminated surfaces and PPE during doffing. Deviations from the recommended PPE doffing protocol are common and can increase potential for contamination of the HCW's clothing or skin after providing care. There is a clear need to change the approach used to training HCWs in PPE doffing practices.

| S-EPMC7157959 | biostudies-literature

Personal Protective Equipment: Current Best Practices for Orthopedic Teams.

Project description:The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV-2) virus is challenging healthcare providers across the world. Current best practices for personal protective equipment (PPE) during this time are rapidly evolving and fluid due to the novel and acute nature of the pandemic and the dearth of high-level evidence. Routine infection control practices augmented by airborne precautions are paramount when treating the COVID-19-positive patient. Best practices for PPE use in patients who have unknown COVID-19 status are a highly charged and emotional issue. The variables to be considered include protection of patients and healthcare providers, accuracy and availability of testing, and responsible use of PPE resources. This article also explores the concerns of surgeons regarding possible transmission to their own family members as a result of caring for COVID-19 patients.

| S-EPMC7169903 | biostudies-literature

Contamination of personal protective equipment during COVID-19 autopsies.

Project description:Confronted with an emerging infectious disease at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the medical community faced concerns regarding the safety of autopsies on those who died of the disease. This attitude has changed, and autopsies are now recognized as indispensable tools for understanding COVID-19, but the true risk of infection to autopsy staff is nevertheless still debated. To clarify the rate of SARS-CoV-2 contamination in personal protective equipment (PPE), swabs were taken at nine points in the PPE of one physician and one assistant after each of 11 full autopsies performed at four centers. Swabs were also obtained from three minimally invasive autopsies (MIAs) conducted at a fifth center. Lung/bronchus swabs of the deceased served as positive controls, and SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected by real-time RT-PCR. In 9 of 11 full autopsies, PPE samples tested RNA positive through PCR, accounting for 41 of the 198 PPE samples taken (21%). The main contaminated items of the PPE were gloves (64% positive), aprons (50% positive), and the tops of shoes (36% positive) while the fronts of safety goggles, for example, were positive in only 4.5% of the samples, and all the face masks were negative. In MIAs, viral RNA was observed in one sample from a glove but not in other swabs. Infectious virus isolation in cell culture was performed on RNA-positive swabs from the full autopsies. Of all the RNA-positive PPE samples, 21% of the glove samples, taken in 3 of 11 full autopsies, tested positive for infectious virus. In conclusion, PPE was contaminated with viral RNA in 82% of autopsies. In 27% of autopsies, PPE was found to be contaminated even with infectious virus, representing a potential risk of infection to autopsy staff. Adequate PPE and hygiene measures, including appropriate waste deposition, are therefore essential to ensure a safe work environment.

| S-EPMC8735722 | biostudies-literature

Contamination of UK firefighters personal protective equipment and workplaces.

Project description:Firefighters' personal protective equipment (PPE) is a potential source of chronic exposure to toxic contaminants commonly released from fires. These contaminants have also been found in fire stations. However, little research characterises the routes via which fire contaminants travel back to fire stations. The UK Firefighter Contamination Survey provides information on firefighters' PPE provision, decontamination, and storage practices. All serving UK firefighters were eligible to take part in the survey, which comprised 64 questions. A total of 10,649 responses were included for analysis, accounting for roughly 24% of the UK's firefighting workforce. Results revealed that most firefighters (84%) de-robe contaminated PPE/workwear after re-entering the appliance cab. There was a significant decreasing tendency to send PPE for cleaning after every incident with increasing seniority of role, length of service, and fire attendance frequency. Around one third of firefighters cleaned PPE after every incident. A number of issues were linked to external professional cleaning services, e.g. shrinkage, fit, turn-around time, and stock of reserve/pooled PPE. PPE storage was found to be a potential source of cross contamination, with almost half of firefighters (45%) indicating clean and dirty PPE is not stored separately. More than half of firefighters (57%) stored fire gloves (an item sent for professional decontamination by only 19% of firefighters, and never cleaned by 20%) within other items of PPE such as helmets, boots and tunic/trouser pockets. The survey's results can be used to target gaps in decontamination measures within UK Fire and Rescue Services.

| S-EPMC9832125 | biostudies-literature

Polymer Additives to Personal Protective Equipment can Inactivate Pathogens.

Project description:Face masks have been proven to be medicine's best public health tool for preventing transmission of airborne pathogens. However, in situations with continuous exposure, lower quality and "do-it-yourself" face masks cannot provide adequate protection against pathogens, especially when mishandled. In addition, the use of multiple face masks each day places a strain on personal protective equipment (PPE) supply and is not environmentally sustainable. Therefore, there is a significant clinical and commercial need for a reusable, pathogen-inactivating face mask. Herein, we propose adding quaternary poly(dimethylaminohexadecyl methacrylate), q(PDMAHDM), abbreviated to q(PDM), to existing fabric networks to generate "contact-killing" face masks-effectively turning cotton, polypropylene, and polyester into pathogen resistant materials. It was found that q(PDM)-integrated face masks were able to inactivate both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria in liquid culture and aerosolized droplets. Furthermore, q(PDM) was electrospun into homogeneous polymer fibers, which makes the polymer practical for low-cost, scaled-up production.

| S-EPMC9569176 | biostudies-literature

Personal protective equipment portraits in the era of COVID-19.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC9132790 | biostudies-literature