Large-scale screening for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among healthcare workers: Prevalence and risk factors for asymptomatic and pauci-symptomatic carriers, with emphasis on the use of personal protective equipment (PPE).
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Rajme-Lopez S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8111176 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:With numerous countermeasures, the number of deaths in the construction industry is still higher compared to other industries. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) is constantly being improved to avoid these accidents, although workers intentionally or unintentionally forget to use such safety measures. It is challenging to manually run a safety check as the number of co-workers on a site can be large; however, it is a prime duty of the authority to provide maximum protection to the workers on the working site. From these motivations, we have created a computer vision (CV) based automatic PPE detection system that detects various types of PPE. This study also created a novel dataset named CHVG (four colored hardhats, vest, safety glass) containing eight different classes, including four colored hardhats, vest, safety glass, person body, and person head. The dataset contains 1,699 images and corresponding annotations of these eight classes. For the detection algorithm, this study has used the You Only Look Once (YOLO) family's anchor-free architecture, YOLOX, which yields better performance than the other object detection models within a satisfactory time interval. Moreover, this study found that the YOLOX-m model yields the highest mean average precision (mAP) than the other three versions of the YOLOX.
| S-EPMC9299268 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We modeled the stability of SARS-CoV-2 on personal protective equipment (PPE) commonly worn in hospitals when carrying out high-risk airway procedures. Evaluated PPE included the visors and hoods of two brands of commercially available powered air purifying respirators, a disposable face shield, and Tyvek coveralls. Following an exposure to 4.3 log10 plaque-forming units (PFUs) of SARS-CoV-2, all materials displayed a reduction in titer of > 4.2 log10 by 72 hours postexposure, with detectable titers at 72 hours varying by material (1.1-2.3 log10 PFU/mL). Our results highlight the need for proper doffing and disinfection of PPE, or disposal, to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 contact or fomite transmission.
| S-EPMC7866333 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess prevalence of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)-related symptoms and adverse reactions during Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemics.MethodsWe conducted an observational study among people exposed to various degree of infectious risk. Data were collected with a self-administered online questionnaire.ResultsThe entire cohort complained about a wide range of adverse reactions: respiratory symptoms affected 80.3% of respondents, 68.5% referred pressure-related skin lesions, fewer manifested a dermatosis of different grade or ocular symptoms. Most of the affected individuals belonged to healthcare staff and manifestations were predicted by wearing time (more than 6 h/d). Moreover, symptoms were higher in the healthcare staff wearing N95/FFP2 respirator mask.ConclusionsGiven the crucial role of PPE to contain the pandemic infection, more attention has to be paid to exposed categories, establishing preventive measure of side effects to ensure total safety.
| S-EPMC7864606 | biostudies-literature
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
Project description:Plastic pollution is one of the major environmental threats the world is facing nowadays, which was exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, multiple reports of single-use plastics driven by the pandemic, namely personal protective equipment (PPE) (e.g., face masks and gloves), contaminating coastal areas have been published. However, most studies focused solely on counting and visually characterizing this type of litter. In the present study, we complement conventional reports by characterizing this type of litter through chemical-analytical techniques. Standardized sampling procedures were carried out in Kish Island, The Persian Gulf, resulting in an average density of 2.34 × 10-4 PPE/m2. Fourier transformed infrared spectroscopy confirmed the polymeric composition of weathered face masks and showed the occurrence of additional absorption bands associated with the photooxidation of the polymer backbone. On the other hand, the three layers of typical surgical face masks showed different non-woven structures, as well as signs of physical degradation (ruptures, cracks, rough surfaces), possibly leading to the release of microplastics. Furthermore, elemental mapping through energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy showed that the middle layer of the masks allocated more elements of external origin (e.g., Na, Cl, Ca, Mg) than the outer and inner layers. This is likely to the overall higher surface area of the middle layer. Furthermore, our evidence indicates that improperly disposed PPE is already having an impact on a number of organisms in the study area.
| S-EPMC9464308 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has revealed vulnerabilities in healthcare systems worldwide, emphasizing the importance of healthcare worker safety through adequate utilization of personal protective equipment (PPE). This study aims to assess the impact of pre-pandemic PPE training on the practices and other associated factors among frontline healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Pakistan and provide insights into the implications of such training programs for future initiatives.MethodsA cross-sectional study from May 9th to June 5th, 2020 was conducted among the frontline healthcare workers against COVID-19 in Pakistan, utilizing an online structured questionnaire shared via WhatsApp and Facebook by using purposive sampling. Statistical analyses, including chi-square tests for proportion and logistic regression for the association while multi-logistic regression for potential confounders, were performed using SPSS version 22.ResultsA total of 453 healthcare staff participated, with 68.9% (n = 312) reporting no prior PPE training and 31.1% (n = 141) having received training. Significant associations were found between prior training and healthcare group distribution (p = 0.006), with doctors exhibiting the highest proportion of training 82 (37.61%), followed by nurses 50 (27.32%) and paramedics 9 (17.31%). Those who didn't receive any prior training in PPEs showed a higher perceived professional risk of 216 (69.23%) compared to those who received prior PPE training 96 (30.77%, p-value 0.005). Similarly, a higher frequency 137 (63.72%) of Perceived Personal risk was observed in those who didn't receive training, labeled as "high risk" compared to those who were trained 78 (36.28%, P value 0.02). Multi-logistic regression analysis identified paramedics as 0.26 times less likely to have received prior PPE training (Adjusted OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.10-0.65, p = 0.01) compared to medical doctors. Healthcare workers in tertiary care hospitals were 0.46 times less likely to undergo PPE training (Adjusted OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.25-0.87,p = 0.01) compared to those working at COVID-19 facilities/hospitals/quarantine centers. Likewise, individuals who doffed disposable gowns [Adjusted OR 3.86, (95% CI, 1.23-12.08, p = 0.02] were 3.86 times more interested in getting prior training in PPE compared to those who don't have skills to wear them.ConclusionOur findings highlight that healthcare levels, type of healthcare, and doffing skills are important predictors of whether healthcare workers have taken prior training in PPE. These findings imply developing effective training programs for healthcare workers to ensure safety while providing care during pandemics like COVID-19.
| S-EPMC10647151 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe use of personal protective equipment (PPE) reduces the risk of transmission of infectious agents significantly among healthcare workers (HCWs). The study aimed to investigate the prevalence and characteristics of PPE-related adverse skin reactions among HCWs working at the main COVID-19 isolation center in Barbados.MethodsA cross-sectional web-based online survey was conducted during April to June 2021 which recorded demographic information, details of PPE use and adverse skin reactions including severity and duration of onset of symptoms.ResultsMost of the respondents used PPE for consecutive days (77.9%), 1-6 h/day (59.2%), and more than a year (62.5%). Fewer than half of the participants (45.6%) experienced adverse skin reactions from the use of PPE. The reactions were mostly observed in the cheeks (40.4%) and nose bridges (35.6%). Females had more reactions than their male counterparts (p = 0.003). The use of N95 masks and a combination of surgical and N95 masks produced adverse effects predominantly in the ears (60%) and cheeks (56.4%). Binary logistic regression showed that female HCWs (OR = 5.720 95% CI: 1.631, 20.063), doctors (OR = 5.215 95% CI: 0.877, 31.002), and longer duration of PPE use (>1 year) (OR = 2.902 95% CI: 0.958, 8.787) caused a significantly higher prevalence of adverse skin reactions.ConclusionThe PPE-related skin reactions were common among HCWs which mainly occurred due to prolonged use. Preventive measures inclusive of appropriate training of HCWs on the use of PPE are recommended to minimize these adverse events.
| S-EPMC9592812 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10569216 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this paper, we examine the cost effectiveness of investment in personal protective equipment (PPE) for protecting health care workers (HCWs) against two infectious diseases: Ebola virus and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). This builds on similar work published for COVID-19 in 2020. We developed two separate decision-analytic models using a payer perspective to compare the costs and effects of multiple PPE use scenarios for protection of HCW against Ebola and MRSA. Bayesian multivariate sensitivity analyses were used to consider the uncertainty surrounding all key parameters for both diseases. We estimate the cost to provide adequate PPE for a HCW encounter with an Ebola patient is $13.04, which is associated with a 97% risk reduction in infections. The mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is $3.98 per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted. Because of lowered infection and disability rates, this investment is estimated to save $132.27 in averted health systems costs, a financial ROI of 1,014%. For MRSA, the cost of adequate PPE for one HCW encounter is $0.88, which is associated with a 53% risk reduction in infections. The mean ICER is $362.14 per DALY averted. This investment is estimated to save $20.18 in averted health systems costs, a financial ROI of 2,294%. In terms of total health savings per death averted, investing in adequate PPE is the dominant strategy for Ebola and MRSA, suggesting that it is both more costly and less clinically optimal to not fully invest in PPE for these diseases. There are many compelling reasons to invest in PPE to protect HCWs. This analysis examines the economic case, building on previous evidence that protecting HCWs with PPE is cost-effective for COVD-19. Ebola and MRSA scenarios were selected to allow assessment of both endemic and epidemic infectious diseases. While PPE is cost-effective for both conditions, compared to our analysis for COVID-19, PPE is relatively more cost-effective for Ebola and relatively less so for MRSA. Further research is needed to assess shortfalls in the PPE supply chain identified during the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure an efficient and resilient supply in the face of future pandemics.
| S-EPMC10286963 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in many supply chain issues, including crippling of essential personal protective equipment (PPE) needed for high-risk occupations such as those in healthcare. As a result of these supply chain issues, unprecedented crisis capacity strategies were implemented to divert PPE items such as filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs, namely N95s) to those who needed them most for protection. Large-scale methods for decontamination were used throughout the world to preserve these items and provided for their extended use. The general public also adopted the use of non-specialized protective equipment such as face coverings. So, the need for cleaning, decontamination, or disinfection of these items in addition to normal clothing items became a necessary reality. Some items could be laundered, but other items were not appropriate for washing/drying. To fill research gaps in small-scale, non-commercial cleaning and disinfection, this bench-scale research was conducted using small coupons (swatches) of multiple PPE/barrier protection materials inoculated with virus (non-pathogenic bacteriophages Phi6 and MS2) and tested against a range of decontamination methods including bleach-, alcohol- and quaternary ammonium compound (QAC)-based liquid sprays, as well as low concentration hydrogen peroxide vapor (LCHPV) and bench-scale laundering. In general, non-porous items were easier to disinfect than porous items, and the enveloped virus Phi6 was overall easier to inactivate than MS2. Multiple disinfection methods were shown to be effective in reducing viral loads from PPE coupons, though only laundering and LCHPV were effective for all materials tested that were inoculated with Phi6. Applications of this and follow-on full-scale research are to provide simple effective cleaning/disinfection methods for use during the current and future pandemics.
| S-EPMC10374148 | biostudies-literature