Human factors issues of working in personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hignett S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7361357 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:This study investigates the forces that contributed to severe shortages in personal protective equipment in the US during the COVID-19 crisis. Problems from a dysfunctional costing model in hospital operating systems were magnified by a very large demand shock triggered by acute need in healthcare and panicked marketplace behavior that depleted domestic PPE inventories. The lack of effective action on the part of the federal government to maintain and distribute domestic inventories, as well as severe disruptions to the PPE global supply chain, amplified the problem. Analysis of trade data shows that the US is the world's largest importer of face masks, eye protection, and medical gloves, making it highly vulnerable to disruptions in exports of medical supplies. We conclude that market prices are not appropriate mechanisms for rationing inputs to health because health is a public good. Removing the profit motive for purchasing PPE in hospital costing models, strengthening government capacity to maintain and distribute stockpiles, developing and enforcing regulations, and pursuing strategic industrial policy to reduce US dependence on imported PPE will help to better protect healthcare workers with adequate supplies of PPE.
| S-EPMC7531934 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn the COVID-19 era physicians have to face with need to perform office procedures maintaining the maximum safety for both the patient and the Doctor himself. The purpose of this paper was to suggest some equipment useful to perform outpatient visits in an ENT setting.MethodsA simple modification of the standard headlight used during an ENT visit provides the operator a better face protection without any impairment in vision and comfort. In addition, in order to perform a safer ENT examination, a droplet protective barrier has been adapted to the patient's chair.ResultsBoth the devices have been texted with success during a period of 2 months in our ENT clinic. No cases of contamination have been registered among physicians.ConclusionA simple modification to a device used in the routine ENT activity implemented its protective efficacy with low costs. On the other hand, a more structured tool permitted to obtain a more protected environment during patient examination.
| S-EPMC7333584 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare the costs incurred and saved from universal use of N95 respirators with surgical masks for operating room providers in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe built a decision analytic model to compare direct medical costs of healthcare workers (HCWs) infected with COVID-19 during operating room procedures from expected transmission when using an N95 respirator relative to a surgical mask. We also examined quarantine costs.ResultsResults varied depending upon prevalence and false-negative rates of tests, but if N95 respirators reduce transmission by 2.8%, prevalence is at 1%, and testing yields 20% false negatives, providers should be willing to pay an additional $0.64 per HCW for the additional protection. Under this scenario, approximately 11 COVID-19 cases would be averted among HCWs per day.ConclusionsPotential savings depend on disease prevalence, rate of asymptomatic patients with COVID-19, accuracy of testing, the marginal cost of respirators, and the quarantine period. We provide a range of calculations to show under which conditions N95 respirators are cost saving.
| S-EPMC9042416 | biostudies-literature
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
Project description:Study objectiveDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, health care workers have had the highest risk of infection among essential workers. Although personal protective equipment (PPE) use is associated with lower infection rates, appropriate use of PPE has been variable among health care workers, even in settings with COVID-19 patients. We aimed to evaluate the patterns of PPE adherence during emergency department resuscitations that included aerosol-generating procedures.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective, video-based review of pediatric resuscitations involving one or more aerosol-generating procedures during the first 3 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States (March to June 2020). Recommended adherence (complete, inadequate, absent) with 5 PPE items (headwear, eyewear, masks, gowns, gloves) and the duration of potential exposure were evaluated for individuals in the room after aerosol-generating procedure initiation.ResultsAmong the 345 health care workers observed during 19 resuscitations, 306 (88.7%) were nonadherent (inadequate or absent adherence) with the recommended use of at least 1 PPE type at some time during the resuscitation, 23 (6.7%) of whom had no PPE. One hundred and forty health care workers (40.6%) altered or removed at least 1 type of PPE during the event. The aggregate time in the resuscitation room for health care workers across all events was 118.7 hours. During this time, providers had either absent or inadequate eyewear for 46.4 hours (39.1%) and absent or inadequate masks for 35.2 hours (29.7%).ConclusionFull adherence with recommended PPE use was limited in a setting at increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 virus aerosolization. In addition to ensuring appropriate donning, approaches are needed for ensuring ongoing adherence with PPE recommendations during exposure.
| S-EPMC8164378 | biostudies-literature
Project description:GetUsPPE.org has built a centralized platform to facilitate matches for PPE donations, with an active role in matching donors with the appropriate recipients. A manual match process was limited by volunteer hours, thus we developed an open-access matching algorithm using a linear programming-based transportation model. From April 14, 2020 to April 27, 2020, the algorithm was used to match 83,136 items of PPE to 135 healthcare facilities in need across the United States with a median of 214.3 miles traveled, 100% of available donations matched, met the full quantity of requested PPE for 67% of recipients matched, and with 46% matches under 30 miles traveled. Compared with the period April 1, 2020 to April 13, 2020, when PPE matching was manual, the algorithm resulted in a 280% increase in matches/day. This publicly available automated algorithm could be deployed in future situations when the healthcare supply chain is insufficient.
| S-EPMC7846564 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo report the details of provision of personal protective equipment to midwives during the COVID-19 pandemic in Peru METHODS: This is a non-experimental, descriptive, cross-sectional study. An online survey of 679 midwives working at public healthcare centres was conducted via questionnaires. The following aspects were outlined: method of supply and frequency of delivery of personal protective equipment, type of personal protective equipment provided by the institution, and self-purchase. Furthermore, features of the midwives' workplace were described. For statistical analysis, absolute frequencies and relative proportions were used for categorical variables, and mean and standard deviation were used for numerical variables.Measurements and findingsThe most important finding of this study is that a large proportion of midwives (66.6%) did not receive new personal protective equipment for each shift; 41.9% of midwives who received personal protective equipment during each shift exclusively provided services in the COVID-19 ward, whereas 27.6% did not. The least received supplies were of N95 respirator masks (41.7%) and disposable isolation suit gown (50.5%). Only a certain proportion of midwives (38.6%) were trained by their own institutions on the use of personal protective equipment.Key conclusionsThe provision of personal protective equipment to midwives and training on personal protective equipment were insufficient at all workplaces. Therefore, measures must be taken to increase the supply of this material to midwives who are essential workers in reproductive health.
| S-EPMC9792185 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8242675 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Personal protective equipment (PPE) is crucially important to the safety of both patients and medical personnel, particularly in the event of an infectious pandemic. As the incidence of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) increases exponentially in the United States and many parts of the world, healthcare provider demand for these necessities is currently outpacing supply. In the midst of the current pandemic, there has been a concerted effort to identify viable ways to conserve PPE, including decontamination after use. In this study, we outline a procedure by which PPE may be decontaminated using ultraviolet (UV) radiation in biosafety cabinets (BSCs), a common element of many academic, public health, and hospital laboratories. According to the literature, effective decontamination of N95 respirator masks or surgical masks requires UV-C doses of greater than 1 Jcm-2, which was achieved after 4.3 hours per side when placing the N95 at the bottom of the BSCs tested in this study. We then demonstrated complete inactivation of the human coronavirus NL63 on N95 mask material after 15 minutes of UV-C exposure at 61 cm (232 μWcm-2). Our results provide support to healthcare organizations looking for methods to extend their reserves of PPE.
| S-EPMC8312969 | biostudies-literature
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