Personal Protective Equipment Measures Research Articles

Hydrogeochemical characteristics and air quality risks associated with gold mining operations in Egypt using geochemical modeling and risk indices

The success of industrial operations depends on the effective identification, appraisal, and mitigation of possible hazards and associated environmental concerns. This report provides a complete review of environmental management techniques at the Sukari Gold Mine (SGM), located in the southeastern desert of Egypt. Extensive environmental measurements were taken to assess air and water quality, identify hazards, and analyze risks on the SGM premises. Air quality and noise intensity levels were measured at 39 places around the mine's working region. The findings found noncompliance with the Egyptian Environmental Law's (EEL4/94) noise exposure limitations, with the Power Generator House having the maximum noise levels at 107 dB. Remedial measures such as personal protective equipment (PPE) and exposure limit reduction strategies are being considered to address elevated noise levels. Measurements of particulate matter (PM10) and noxious gases (e.g., CO, SO2, NO2, HCN, and NH3) were conducted in workplace and ambient environments. Elevated PM10 concentrations were particularly concerning in underground regions, forcing the deployment of water depression techniques and improved PPE measures. While gas emissions from most activities remained under regulatory limits, select zones showed hydrogen cyanide (HCN) levels that exceeded permitted thresholds, necessitating specific control actions. Using hazard index (HI) and risk rating assessments, this study found different risk profiles across SGM's workplaces, focusing on high-risk regions for focused intervention. Additionally, a water assessment near a Tailing Storage Facility (TSF) was conducted to monitor the impact of mining activities on groundwater quality. The study revealed that groundwater in the region belongs to the Na–K–Cl–SO4 and Ca–Mg–Cl–SO4 water classes, with potential degradation attributed to high mineralization processes induced by aquifer materials and seawater intrusion. The findings underscore the importance of ongoing monitoring, control measures, and implementation of programs to ensure environmental sustainability and minimize risks associated with mining activities in the Sukari Gold Mines. This research highlights the imperative of continuous monitoring, proactive control measures, and the implementation of environmental initiatives to ensure the sustainability of mining operations within the Sukari Gold Mines.

Analysis of Infection Prevention and Control Program Implementation on Nurses in the Room Dr. Fauziah Bireuen) Hospitals Makasaar

The study aims to analyze the implementation of infection prevention and control programs. This type of research is qualitative with a phenomenological approach. The research informants were 11 people consisting of 3 nurses, 3 heads of rooms, 1 head of the PPI committee, 1 IPCN, 1 Deputy Director of Services, 1 Head of Nursing and 1 Head of Medical Services. The research was conducted in November–December 2021 through interviews and observations. The data were analyzed using qualitative descriptive through the stages of data reduction, presentation and conclusion drawing. It can be concluded that the implementation of the PPI (Infection Prevention Program) program is not entirely in accordance with SPO (Standard Operating Procedures) due to the lack of compliance by nurses, lack of implementation of aseptic actions in HAIs (Healthcare Associated Infection) bundles, lack of regular and inaccurate training. submission of monthly reports. So it is recommended for hospital management and staff to make policies that regulate the commitment of all health workers in implementing the PPI (Infection Prevention Program) program, being a role model / role model in the implementation of the PPI (Infection Prevention Program) program such as in inviting, familiarizing hand hygiene activities. , use of PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) and aseptic measures and routinely carry out training / training on a regular basis.

Demographic, behavioural and occupational risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection in UK healthcare workers: a retrospective observational study

ObjectiveHealthcare workers (HCWs) are at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection than the general population. This group is pivotal to healthcare system resilience during the COVID-19, and future, pandemics. We investigated...

Challenges to infection control in early communication intervention: A scoping review.

BackgroundPersonal protective equipment (PPE) and infection prevention and control (IPC) measures are crucial to preventing the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study used a scoping review to investigate the challenges that exist when speech–language therapists (SLTs) use IPC measures for providing early communication intervention (ECI).ObjectivesTo describe existing, recent literature on PPE and IPC measures used in early intervention through a scoping review (steps 1–5) and to consult local clinicians to investigate how SLTs who provide ECI in South Africa relate to these findings (step 6 of the scoping review).MethodA scoping review was performed which followed the PRISMA-ScR framework. Because of limited literature on PPE and IPC measures used by SLTs in providing ECI, the inclusion criteria were adjusted to include PPE and IPC measures used by healthcare workers (HCWs) who provide early intervention to the population of infants and toddlers up to 3 years old. At the time of the review, articles were not older than 10 years and were published between 2011 and 2020. The scoping review included a consultation with South African SLTs who provide ECI, including during the COVID-19 pandemic. A pilot study was conducted prior to the consultations. Seventeen clinicians were included in total. Data from both the pilot study and main consultation were transcribed and analysed in the results using thematic analysis.ResultsFourteen articles were included in the study. The scoping review of existing literature identified challenges to implementing IPC measures, namely the care and behaviour of young children, infrastructure and system challenges, poor compliance and lack of training and a lack of standard IPC protocols. Clinicians in the consultation phase confirmed these challenges and reported that IPC measures did not consider ECI populations nor the settings in which services were provided. Suggestions from the literature for improved infection control included hand hygiene, improved supplies and infrastructure and education and training. Clinicians in the consultation added practical suggestions for implementing IPC measures within ECI, which included an increase in parent-led intervention as well as cleaning and disinfection strategies.ConclusionThis study identified challenges and recommendations of SLTs who use PPE and IPC measures whilst providing ECI. Understanding these challenges can benefit ECI services and future research efforts focused on improving ECI services whilst maintaining IPC standards.

Experiences of U.S. Nurses Compared With Nonnurses in the First Year of COVID-19: Findings From a National Registry.

Nursing professional organizations and media sources indicated early in the pandemic that the physical and psychological effects of COVID-19 might be distinct and possibly greater in nurses than in other types of healthcare workers (HCWs). Based on survey data collected in Healthcare Worker Exposure Response and Outcomes (HERO), a national registry of U.S. HCWs, this study compared the self-reported experiences of nurses with other HCWs during the first 13 months of the pandemic. Nurse responses were compared to responses of nonnurse HCWs in terms of viral exposure, testing and infection, access to personal protective equipment (PPE), burnout, and well-being. Logistic regression models were used to examine associations between nurse and nonnurse roles for the binary end points of viral testing and test positivity for COVID-19. We also examined differences by race/ethnicity and high-risk versus low-risk practice settings. Of 24,343 HCWs in the registry, one third self-identified as nurses. Nurses were more likely than other HCWs to report exposure to SARS-CoV-2, problems accessing PPE, and decreased personal well-being, including burnout, feeling tired, stress, trouble sleeping, and worry. In adjusted models, nurses were more likely than nonnurse HCWs to report viral testing and test positivity for COVID-19 infection. Nurses in high-risk settings were more likely to report viral exposure and symptoms related to well-being; nurses in low-risk settings were more likely to report viral testing and test positivity. Black or Hispanic nurses were most likely to report test positivity. Differences were identified between nurses and nonnurse HCWs in access to PPE, physical and mental well-being measures, and likelihood of reporting exposure and infection. Among nurses, testing and infection differed based on race and ethnicity, and type of work setting. Our findings suggest further research and policy are needed to elucidate and address social and occupational disparities.

Contamination of personal protective equipment during COVID-19 autopsies

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.

COVID-19: acceptance and compliance of PPE (personal protective equipment) and rules for hygiene and reducing contacts in German emergency medical services-a nationwide survey

HintergrundDie COVID-19-Pandemie (coronavirus disease-2019) hat auch den deutschen Rettungsdienst deutlich belastet und gefordert. Die persönliche Schutzausrüstung (PSA) und die AHA-L-Regel (Abstand halten, Hygiene beachten, Maske tragen, regelmäßig lüften) spielen hierbei eine wichtige Rolle, um eine Verbreitung der COVID-19-Infektionen zu reduzieren.ZielMit dieser Studie möchten wir die Akzeptanz und Compliance von PSA und Schutzmaßnahmen beim Rettungsdienstpersonal in Deutschland in Pandemiezeiten evaluieren.MethodeÜber 270 ÄLRD wurden angeschrieben. Diese wurden gebeten, eine webbasierte Onlineumfrage an die Rettungswachen weiterzuleiten. Die Teilnehmer wurden zu Akzeptanz und Compliance im Alltag, in der Rettungswache, im Einsatz ohne COVID-19, im Einsatz mit COVID-19 befragt.ErgebnisseEs haben n = 1295 Personen teilgenommen. Die Akzeptanz und Compliance von PSA und Schutzmaßnahmen ist insgesamt hoch. Die geringste Akzeptanz und Compliance findet sich bei den Fragen Akzeptanz (MW = 4,16; ±1,01) und Compliance (MW = 4,26; ±0,89) in der Rettungswache.FazitWir empfehlen gezielte Schulungsmaßnahmen in Bezug auf PSA in Pandemien und die Bereitstellung von entsprechenden Räumlichkeiten zur konfliktlosen Einhaltung der AHA-L-Regeln.

Skin problems related to personal protective equipment among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic (online research)

Introduction Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is a highly contagious infectious disease that first appeared in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. Health care workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of infection because the virus is highly contagious and can be transmitted by a variety of routes. Health care workers are required to use a variety of personal protective equipment (PPE) for prolonged hours and, as a result, they face varying degrees of cutaneous complications. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional online questionnaire survey to investigate skin problems caused by the use of PPE and personal hygiene measures. We developed a survey with 32 questions using Google forms and distributed it via WhatsApp and Facebook groups. Results A total of 1142 responses were obtained. Among the respondents, 88.1% reported adverse skin reactions due to PPE and personal hygiene measures. Female sex, working as a nurse, wearing PPE more than 6 h/day, and working more than 3 days/week increase the risk of PPE-related skin problems. Conclusion In this study, we highlighted skin problems related to PPE and found out risk factors for PPE-related skin problems.

Skin adverse events related to personal protective equipment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a global pandemic that has spread all over the word. To avoid the virus transmission, healthcare workers must wear adequate personal protective equipment (PPE). PPE is associated with several side events, including skin reactions. The objective of this study was to summarize the prevalence, type and risk factors for cutaneous adverse events related to PPE and prevention measures to avoid them. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using MEDLINE, Scopus and EMBASE databases from conception to 21 January 2021. All types of epidemiological studies regarding skin adverse events related to PPE were included. The literature search identified 1007 references, 35 of them met the eligible criteria and were included for analysis, representing 31453 participants. The media of skin side events related to PPE was 75.13%. The rate of cutaneous adverse events related to mask was 57.71%, and those associated with gloves and hand hygiene products was 49.16%. Most common skin adverse events were contact dermatitis, acne and itching. The most damaged anatomical regions were the nasal bridge, the cheeks and the hands. The duration of PPE wearing was the most common risk factor. Frequent handwashing, gloves and masks were the agents most frequently related to skin reactions. N95 respirators were the most harmful mask type for the skin. Hydrocolloid use prevented from developing skin adverse events related to masks. In conclusion, the rate of cutaneous adverse events related to PPE use is high. A longer duration of PPE wearing was the most common risk factor. Using hydrocolloid could prevent from skin injuries related to mask use.

Health care workers protection during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

The infection risk among frontline health care workers (HCW) is one of the most concerning aspects of COVID-19. Knowledge about SARS-CoV-2 transmission is still insufficient. However, direct, person-to-person contact appears to be the main route. Secondary transmission can also occur and intensive care units have shown greater contamination than general wards. Risk of transmission by infectious aerosols distributed through the ventilation system duct is considered to be very low. Screening and triaging everyone entering a health care facility is crucial in order to prevent rapid spread among hospital personnel and patients. Recommendations on airborne precautions in the health care setting vary by location, but are universally to be implemented when aerosol-generating procedures are performed. Surgical masks or respirators are currently critical supplies that should be reserved for HCW. Both types of masks need to be used in combination with other personal protective equipment measures. COVID-19 patients should be cohorted and only patients undergoing aerosol generating procedures should be placed in airborne infection isolation rooms.

Impact of COVID-19 on Outcomes and Productivity in a Gynecologic Oncology and Minimally Invasive Surgery Practice

Study ObjectiveTo determine the impact of COVID-19 on patients undergoing surgery.DesignRetrospective review.SettingCommunity hospital and ambulatory practice in New York near the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic.Patients or ParticipantsSurgical volumes were reviewed for years 2019-2020.InterventionsSeventy-three charts were assessed for COVID-19 related outcomes during a 14-week period, beginning February 17th, 2020.Measurements and Main ResultsDuring the study period, gynecologic oncology and minimally invasive surgery activity decreased by 50%. This resulted in economic and clinical disruption. Other surgical divisions showed similar case decreases (34 – 64%) except for otolaryngology which increased by 48%.Seventy-one surgeries were completed in our practice during the study period. Elective cases were restricted on March 7th. Afterward, indications for surgery were malignancy (43.2%), rule out malignancy (27.0%), heavy bleeding (21.6%), and pain (8.1%). All patients were asymptomatic for COVID-19 associated symptoms during preoperative evaluations.Mandatory day-of-surgery COVID-19 PCR testing commenced on April 6th. Prior to this, 49 surgeries were completed. Afterward, 4 of the remaining 21 cases (18%) were cancelled due to positive testing. Of these, 3 tested positive on day of surgery, 1 self-tested positive due to community exposure. All 4 patients remained asymptomatic.Of the 71 patients, 83% were discharged on the same day or on postoperative day one (POD). Postoperatively, 6 patients reported mild COVID-19 symptoms (cough, fever, shortness of breath). Of these, 1 patient tested negative and 5 were not tested. Additionally, 1 patient tested positive remote from surgery (POD #30). Surgeons tested negative for COVID-19 antibodies, and all office staff were asymptomatic.ConclusionAsymptomatic COVID-19 patients were encountered in the preoperative setting. No symptomatic cases of nosocomial COVID-19 infection were identified. Clinical care and surgery appear safe provided there is appropriate utilization of personal protective equipment (PPE). Gynecologic surgical services may be safely performed during a pandemic with appropriate PPE and safety measures.

Real‐world assessment, relevance, and problems in use of personal protective equipment in clinical dermatology practice in a COVID referral tertiary hospital

BackgroundDoctors and healthcare workers (HCW) are at frontline in control of the pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus infection (COVID‐19). The virus is transmitted by contact, droplet, and airborne transmission; hence, hand hygiene, social distancing, environmental disinfection, and use of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) form important components to protect HCWs from cross‐infection. Appropriate use of PPE is of paramount importance not only to reduce the risk of transmission but also to maintain adequate stock for those who are dealing directly with COVID‐19 patients.AimsIn this article, we aim to provide the rationale for appropriate use of PPE in the dermatology setting in the current scenario. We have also discussed the scientific evidence for use of each component of protection and the practical problems faced in our COVID referral tertiary hospital.MethodsOur review was based on articles that have studied or analyzed the efficacy of various protective measures being utilized by health workers against spread of COVID‐19. This was done by carrying out a PUBMED search with terms “coronavirus, COVID‐19, personal protective equipment (PPE), transmission, mask, face shields, goggles, gloves.” We also scrutinized the various pragmatic issues being faced by doctors in our setup while using PPE.ResultsIn order to maximize the appropriate use of PPE, the rationale for use needs to be understood and problems encountered in daily practice need to be addressed.ConclusionAdherence to protective measures and use of PPE is of utmost importance for HCWs to prevent cross‐infection in this pandemic. The use of PPE can limit transmission to a great extent, but appropriate use and avoiding misuse is equally important in the dermatology setting in order to avoid depletion of stock. It is also essential to consider various practical issues with use of PPE and device measures to avoid them so that breach in protocols can be prevented and spread of infection minimized.

Strategies for Infection Control and Prevalence of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG Antibodies in 4,554 Employees of a University Hospital in Munich, Germany

Background: Hospital staff are at high risk of infection during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. We analysed the exposure characteristics, efficacy of protective measures, and transmission dynamics in this hospital-wide prospective seroprevalence study.Methods: Overall, 4554 individuals were tested for anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) IgG antibodies using a chemiluminescent immunoassay. Individual risk factors, use of personal protective equipment (PPE), occupational exposure, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, and symptoms were assessed using a questionnaire and correlated to anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody titres and PCR testing results. Odds ratios with corresponding exact 95% confidence intervals were used to evaluate associations between individual factors and seropositivity. Spatio-temporal trajectories of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients and staff mobility within the hospital were visualised to identify local hotspots of virus transmission.Findings: The overall seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2-IgG antibody was 2•4% [95% CI 1•9–2•9]. Patient-facing staff, including those working in COVID-19 areas, had a similar probability of being seropositive as non-patient-facing staff. Prior interaction with SARS-CoV-2-infected co-workers or private contacts and unprotected exposure to COVID-19 patients increased the probability of seropositivity. Loss of smell and taste had the highest positive predictive value for seropositivity. The rate of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections was 25•9%, and higher anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody titres were observed in symptomatic individuals. Spatio-temporal hotspots of SARS-CoV-2-positive staff and patients only showed partial overlap.Interpretation: Patient-facing work in a healthcare facility during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic may be safe if adequate PPE and hygiene measures are applied. The high numbers of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections that escaped detection by symptomatic testing underline the value of cross-sectional seroprevalence studies. Unprotected contact is a major risk factor for infection and argues for the rigorous implementation of hygiene measures. Funding: The study was funded by the Board of Directors of the University Hospital rechts der Isar, Munich.Declaration of Interests: The authors declare no competing interests.Ethics Approval Statement: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine (approval number: 216/20S).

The Urologist, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and COVID-19

Background and Objective To review the literature from a urologist’s perspective regarding the use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), associated challenges, and other potential measures that can be taken to reduce the risk of nosocomial COVID-19 transmission. Material and Methods A literature review using PubMed, Cochrane Review, and Google Scholar database search was performed using the keyword terms “COVID-19”, “Coronavirus”, “Personal Protective Equipment” (PPE), “healthcare workers” (HCW), “protection”, “masks”, and “urology”. Non-English articles were excluded. We present a summary of key guidance provided by regulatory bodies as well as some of the key articles published to date relating to PPE. Discussion SARS-CoV-2 virus is found mainly in the respiratory system but is also in blood, feces, semen, and urine. Both standard infection control precautions (SICPs) and transmission-based precautions (TBPs) are necessary to reduce nosocomial transmission of COVID-19 infection. PPE includes gowns, gloves, masks or respirators, goggles, and face shields; however, wearing PPE is only part of many precautionary measures that are necessary to prevent viral transmission. When used appropriately PPE not only protects HCWs from patients but also protects patients from HCWs who may be asymptomatic carriers of COVID-19 infection. Attention should also be paid to fit testing and fit checking, donning and doffing, and ever-evolving guidelines on PPE. Wearing PPE for a long time is also technically challenging and may adversely affect surgical outcomes. Shortages of PPE in the supply chain during the peak of the pandemic as well as concerns about substandard PPE should be considered for a possible second wave of COVID-19. Other key measures to minimize nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 virus transmission are a symptom and temperature screening of patients and staff; controlling the flow of patients, staff, and relatives in hospitals; self-isolation by patients before elective surgery; a robust testing protocol for both patients and staff; patient and staff cohorting; physical distancing; good hand hygiene; respiratory etiquette including face coverings for patients, staff and visitors; proper disposal of waste and enhanced cleaning; thorough cleaning and sterilization of surgical equipment performed post-operatively; choosing suitable anesthetic methods to minimize aerosolization of the virus; and if possible ensuring a negative-pressure theatre environment while dealing with COVID-19 positive patients. As scientific and regulatory bodies continue to issue updated guidance as more data is collected and a better knowledge base is developed regarding COVID-19 employers and staff need to keep up to date with guidance also. Conclusion COVID-19 will be around for the foreseeable future and infection rates may fluctuate as restrictions are eased. HCWs including urologists should take appropriate PPE measures not only in theatres, clinics, and endoscopy suits but also when performing simple tasks such as urine dipsticks, catheter, nephrostomy management, digital rectal examination (DRE), prostate biopsies, etc. as SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in feces, urine, and semen. Both employers and HCWs should adhere strictly to current guidelines and work together to minimize nosocomial transmission of COVID-19 infection.

Problems and solutions of personal protective equipment doffing in COVID-19.

The progress of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is still severe. While everyone has been striving very hard to combat the pandemic, some healthcare professionals have shown varying degrees of infection symptoms and even died. The Chinese Army Medical Aid Team arrived in Wuhan on January 25, 2020, and quickly entered the battle against the pandemic after a short and rigorous training. As one of the earliest medical teams to enter the pandemic area, researchers have been exploring effective infection control measures that are currently in practice. Through observation and research, it has been noticed that layers of protective equipment have a hidden danger of infection while protecting the safety of the personnel. The members of each medical team have typically focused on the standard use of personal protective equipment (PPE). However, after a long period of intensive diagnosis and treatment in clinics and due to physical exertion and tiredness, problems such as improper operation are prone to occur during the tedious PPE doffing, thereby producing a relatively high risk of infection. This study primarily analyzes PPE doffing procedures, existing problems, and measures for improvement to explore methods to improve PPE donning and doffing and reduce the risk of infection.

Does Gender or Religion Contribute to the Risk of COVID-19 in Hospital Doctors in the UK?

The novel coronavirus pandemic is posing significant challenges to healthcare workers (HCWs) in adjusting to redeployed clinical settings and enhanced risk to their own health. Studies suggest a variable impact of COVID-19 based on factors such as age, gender, comorbidities and ethnicity. Workplace measures such as personal protective equipment (PPE), social distancing (SD) and avoidance of exposure for the vulnerable, mitigate this risk. This online questionnaire-based study explored the impact of gender and religion in addition to workplace measures associated with risk of COVID-19 in hospital doctors in acute and mental health institutions in the UK. The survey had 1206 responses, majority (94%) from BAME backgrounds. A quarter of the respondents had either confirmed or suspected COVID-19, a similar proportion reported inadequate PPE and 2/3 could not comply with SD. One third reported being reprimanded in relation to PPE or avoidance of risk. In univariate analysis, age over 50 years, being female, Muslim and inability to avoid exposure in the workplace was associated with risk of COVID-19. On multivariate analysis, inadequate PPE remained an independent predictor with a twofold (OR 2.29, (CI - 1.22-4.33), p=0.01) risk of COVID-19. This study demonstrates that PPE, SD and workplace measures to mitigate risk remain important for reducing the risk of COVID-19 in hospital doctors. Gender and religion did not appear to be independent determinants. It is imperative that employers consolidate risk reduction measures and foster a culture of safety to encourage employees to voice any safety concerns.

Rational perspectives on risk and certainty for dentistry during the COVID-19 pandemic

Rational perspectives on risk and certainty for dentistry during the COVID-19 pandemic

Lasting lessons learnt in the radiology department from the battle with COVID-19

Lasting lessons learnt in the radiology department from the battle with COVID-19

Strategies for Optimizing the Supply of N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic.

N95 respirators are personal protective equipment most often used to control exposures to infections transmitted via the airborne route. Supplies of N95 respirators can become depleted during pandemics or when otherwise in high demand. In this paper, we offer strategies for optimizing supplies of N95 respirators in health care settings while maximizing the level of protection offered to health care personnel when there is limited supply in the United States during the 2019 coronavirus disease pandemic. The strategies are intended for use by professionals who manage respiratory protection programs, occupational health services, and infection prevention programs in health care facilities to protect health care personnel from job-related risks of exposure to infectious respiratory illnesses. Consultation with federal, state, and local public health officials is also important. We use the framework of surge capacity and the occupational health and safety hierarchy of controls approach to discuss specific engineering control, administrative control, and personal protective equipment measures that may help in optimizing N95 respirator supplies.

Personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 crisis: a snapshot and recommendations from the frontline of a university teaching hospital.

AimsThe adequate provision of personal protective equipment (PPE) for healthcare workers has come under considerable scrutiny during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to evaluate staff awareness of PPE guidance, perceptions of PPE measures, and concerns regarding PPE use while caring for COVID-19 patients. In addition, responses of doctors, nurses, and other healthcare professionals (OHCPs) were compared.MethodsThe inclusion criteria were all staff working in clinical areas of the hospital. Staff were invited to take part using a link to an online questionnaire advertised by email, posters displayed in clinical areas, and social media. Questions grouped into the three key themes - staff awareness, perceptions, and concerns - were answered using a five-point Likert scale. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare results across all three groups of staff.ResultsOverall, 315 staff took part in our study. There was a high awareness of PPE guidance at 84.4%, but only 52.4% of staff reported adequate PPE provision. 67.9% were still keen to come to work, despite very high levels of anxiety relating to contracting COVID-19 despite wearing PPE. Doctors had significantly higher ratings for questions relating to PPE awareness compared to other staff groups, while nursing staff and OHCPs had significantly higher levels of anxiety compared to doctors in relation to PPE and contracting COVID-19 (p < 0.05 using a Kruskal-Wallis test).ConclusionWe believe four recommendations are key to improve PPE measures and decrease anxiety: 1) nominated ward/department PPE champions; 2) anonymized reporting for PPE concerns; 3) formal PPE education sessions; and 4) drop-in counselling sessions for staff. We hope the insight and recommendations from this study can improve the PPE situation and maintain the health and wellbeing of the clinical work force, in order to care for COVID-19 patients safely and effectively.