Dataset Information

Prevalence of Adverse Skin Reactions in Nursing Staff Due to Personal Protective Equipment during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

ABSTRACT: In order to prevent the nosocomial transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, it has become necessary for health workers to increase their use of personal protective equipment (PPE). The aim of the study was to investigate the prevalence and influencing factors for adverse skin reactions (ASR) due to occupational PPE use among nursing staff in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study uses a mixed methods design. A focus group was created with experts from the field of healthcare, and an online survey was then carried out among nursing staff. Influencing factors were identified using multivariate logistic regression via odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 2274 nursing staff took part in the survey, with 1967 included in the analysis. The prevalence of ASR was 61%, with 94% affecting at least one area of the face. Statistically significant factors of influence were Filtering Face Peace (FFP) mask wearing duration of ≥4 h, a history of contact allergies, and being female and young. A pre-existing skin disease had a protective effect. The prevalence of PPE-related ASR underlines the necessity for targeted preventive measures for nursing staff during pandemic situation.

SUBMITTER: Westermann C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9566727 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Prevalence of Adverse Skin Reactions in Nursing Staff Due to Personal Protective Equipment during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Westermann Claudia C Zielinski Nika N Altenburg Christiane C Dulon Madeleine M Kleinmüller Olaf O Kersten Jan Felix JF Nienhaus Albert A

International journal of environmental research and public health 20221001 19

In order to prevent the nosocomial transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, it has become necessary for health workers to increase their use of personal protective equipment (PPE). The aim of the study was to investigate the prevalence and influencing factors for adverse skin reactions (ASR) due to occupational PPE use among nursing staff in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study uses a mixed methods design. A focus group was created with experts from the field of healthcare, and an online ...[more]

PMID: 36231831

Similar Datasets

Project description:AbstractThe pandemic of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has caused an unprecedented mobilization of the United States' healthcare workforce. In addition to working extended hours under increased duress, healthcare professionals (HCP) of all stations have been making use of various types of personal protective equipment (PPE) with greatly increased frequency and duration. Current data regarding adverse skin reactions as a possible consequence of PPE use are, particularly in the United States, largely insufficient for policy-makers to make informed decisions regarding daily PPE use among HCP.The research vehicle employed by this study is a cross-sectional 25-item survey distributed via email to workers currently employed by a five-hospital system in southcentral Kentucky. This survey was used to collect information from hospital workers of all professional roles about their experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on reports of adverse dermatological reactions and associated risk factors.Out of 879 respondents, 54.4% reported some type of skin irritation reaction. Skin irritation was significantly more prevalent among medical and medical support staff than non-medical hospital workers, with the highest prevalence among Certified Nurse Assistant (CNAs). Among clinical workers, those in dedicated COVID-19 units reported the highest prevalence of adverse skin reaction. The most common complaint was dryness/scaling of the skin (306 out of 439, 69.7%), and the most common location was the facial cheeks (305 out of 516, 59.1%). Among those who reported skin irritation, the average self-reported severity of skin reaction (on a scale of 1-5) was 2.00 ± 0.05, and the mean total days of skin reaction per month was 11.70 ± 0.39 days. Total days of irritation per month was found to be significantly related to "total days of PPE use per month," "hours of PPE use per day," "frequency of hand washing," and "use of disinfecting UV irradiation." Severity of skin reaction was found to be significantly related to "hours per day of PPE use," "consecutive days of PPE use," and "female sex."Clinical workers that put in the most face-to-face time with patients, and those in dedicated COVID-19 units, had the highest risk of adverse skin reaction. Overall, skin reactions were found to be mild, even in those hospital workers with the heaviest PPE use. Because the widespread and consistent use of facial masks in public settings has become a key tool in our protracted struggle with SARS-CoV-2, these findings may help to ameliorate concerns that everyday facial mask and/or other PPE usage contributes to significant dermatologic morbidity among both medical professionals and public citizens.

Project description:BackgroundUS nursing homes are required to follow Centers for Disease Control guidance for COVID-19 transmission-based precautions (TBP) when admitting COVID-positive patients.ObjectiveTo assess how frequently nursing homes had shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) or staffing in weeks when they admitted COVID-positive patients, which likely made it more difficult to follow TBP, and to compare facility characteristics by admissions practices.Design and settingFacility-level data from the Nursing Home COVID-19 Public File for the period between June 7, 2020 and March 7, 2021 was combined with additional data. The percentages of nursing homes that admitted COVID-positive patients and that had shortages when admitting were calculated for each week. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression models were used to examine the relationship between facility characteristics and the likelihood of admitting COVID-positive patients.MeasurementsFacilities were categorized as having admitted COVID-positive patients in a week if one or more admissions requiring TBP were reported for that week. Facilities that reported having less than a 1-week supply of any type of PPE or being short any type of staff in a week were defined, respectively, as having a PPE shortage or staffing shortage in that week.ResultsOver the 40-week study period, 39% of US nursing homes admitted COVID-positive patients in at least 1 week in which they were experiencing PPE or staffing shortages. Facilities that admitted COVID-positive patients with shortages generally had lower Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services overall five-star ratings than other facilities. Only a small percentage of facilities that admitted COVID-positive patients while facing shortages were located in counties with severe shortages of PPE or staffing. In logistic regression models, shortages were not associated with COVID-positive admissions.ConclusionThe widespread practice of admitting COVID-positive patients while facing shortages may have put nursing home residents and staff at heightened risk of COVID-19 infection.

Dataset Information

Prevalence of Adverse Skin Reactions in Nursing Staff Due to Personal Protective Equipment during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Publications

Prevalence of Adverse Skin Reactions in Nursing Staff Due to Personal Protective Equipment during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets