scholarly journals Use of Personal Protective Equipment and Operating Room Behaviors in Four Surgical Subspecialties: Personal Protective Equipment and Behaviors in Surgery

1999 ◽  
Vol 20 (02) ◽  
pp. 110-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deniz Akduman ◽  
Lynn E. Kim ◽  
Rodney L. Parks ◽  
Paul B. L'Ecuyer ◽  
Sunita Mutha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Operating Room ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Hand Surgery ◽  
Occupational Exposures ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Exposure Rate ◽  
Total Exposure

AbstractObjective:To evaluate Universal Precautions (UP) compliance in the operating room (OR).Design:Prospective observational cohort. Trained observers recorded information about (1) personal protective equipment used by OR staff; (2) eyewear, glove, or gown breaks; (3) the nature of sharps transfers; (4) risk-taking behaviors of the OR staff; and (5) needlestick injuries and other blood and body-fluid exposures.Setting:Barnes-Jewish Hospital, a 1,000-bed, tertiary-care hospital affiliated with Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri.Participants:OR personnel in four surgical specialties (gynecologic, orthopedic, cardiothoracic, and general). Procedures eligible for the study were selected randomly. Hand surgery and procedures requiring no or a very small incision (eg, arthroscopy, laparoscopy) were excluded.Results:A total of 597 healthcare workers' procedures were observed in 76 surgical cases (200 hours). Of the 597 healthcare workers, 32% wore regular glasses, and 24% used no eye protection. Scrub nurses and medical students were more likely than other healthcare workers to wear goggles. Only 28% of healthcare workers double gloved, with orthopedic surgery personnel being the most compliant. Sharps passages were not announced in 91% of the surgical procedures. In 65 cases (86%), sharps were adjusted manually. Three percutaneous and 14 cutaneous exposures occurred, for a total exposure rate of 22%.Conclusion:OR personnel had poor compliance with UP. Although there was significant variation in use of personal protective equipment between groups, the total exposure rate was high (22%), indicating the need for further training and reinforcement of UP to reduce occupational exposures.

scholarly journals Psychological Impact of Covid-19 Pandemic on the Healthcare Workers of a Tertiary Care Hospital of Lahore

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-50
Author(s):  
Maria Aslam ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Distress ◽  
Psychological Stress ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Tertiary Care Hospital ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Psychological Impact ◽  
Family Members ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Care Hospital

Background: The psychological stress associated with the COVID-19 pandemic can have long-term effects on the health and coping abilities of HCWs. COVID 19 has exhausted the healthcare workers globally both physically and mentally. This article focuses on the Psychological stresses faced by the healthcare workers of a tertiary setup. Objective: To determine the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the healthcare workers (HCWs) of a tertiary care hospital of Lahore. Study Design: Descriptive, cross-sectional study. Settings: Sharif Medical City Hospital, Lahore Pakistan. Duration: From July 2020 to August 2020. Methodology: A total of 82 healthcare workers were enrolled in the study on a voluntary basis by convenient sampling technique and filled an online questionnaire including demographic information, informed consent, validated Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scales (DASS-21) and the factors causing psychological distress. The data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 24. Results: Out of 82 HCWs, 47(57.3%) had stress, 42(51.2%) had depression and 29(35.4%) had anxiety. Most of the HCWs with stress had mild and moderate stress. The majority of the HCWs were suffering from moderate depression and moderate anxiety. The most common factor causing psychological stress among HCWs was the fear of getting infected with COVID-19 followed by chances of spreading the disease to family members and the non-availability of personal protective equipment. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has a great psychological impact on the healthcare workers in Pakistan. A large proportion of HCWs suffered from stress (57.3%), depression (51.2%) and anxiety (35.4%). The most common factors causing psychological distress in HCWs were the fear of getting infected with COVID-19 (80.5%), chances of spreading the disease to family members (65.9%) and the non-availability of personal protective equipment (59.8%).

scholarly journals Protocols and safety measurements used in intubation of COVID-19 patients

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmed Fouad Bogari ◽  
Nada Mohmmad Alharbi ◽  
Mohammed Abdulrahman Alaqlan ◽  
Turki Salem Aljaza ◽  
Ali Ibrahim Alibrahim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Infection Control ◽  
Operating Room ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Critical Approach ◽  
Research Papers ◽  
Anesthesia Equipment ◽  
Proper Disposal

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced many countries to pose an emergency to contain the contamination and prevent the further spread of the infection. In this context, many societies and research papers were published to optimize guidelines and protocols for patients undergoing surgery and subsequent intubation. Accordingly, infection control is a critical approach to reduce the rate of contamination and risk of catching infections for suspected and confirmed COVID-19 patients. As a result, various guidelines were discussed in the current literature review, including guidelines to the patient, healthcare workers, operating room, anesthesia equipment, and patient transportation. For instance, healthcare workers can protect themselves from catching infections by wearing personal protective equipment and conducting adequate disinfection measures following each operation, in addition to the proper disposal of the contaminated objects. Strictly following these protocols should be done to reduce the risk of contamination in the operating room and enhance the outcomes of the patients and healthcare workers.

scholarly journals Assessment of Healthcare Worker Protocol Deviations and Self-Contamination During Personal Protective Equipment Donning and Doffing

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (9) ◽  
pp. 1077-1083 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennie H. Kwon ◽  
Carey-Ann D. Burnham ◽  
Kimberly A. Reske ◽  
Stephen Y. Liang ◽  
Tiffany Hink ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Worker ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Ebola Virus ◽  
Virus Disease ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Contact Precaution ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Ms2 Bacteriophage ◽  
Protocol Deviation

OBJECTIVETo evaluate healthcare worker (HCW) risk of self-contamination when donning and doffing personal protective equipment (PPE) using fluorescence and MS2 bacteriophage.DESIGNProspective pilot study.SETTINGTertiary-care hospital.PARTICIPANTSA total of 36 HCWs were included in this study: 18 donned/doffed contact precaution (CP) PPE and 18 donned/doffed Ebola virus disease (EVD) PPE.INTERVENTIONSHCWs donned PPE according to standard protocols. Fluorescent liquid and MS2 bacteriophage were applied to HCWs. HCWs then doffed their PPE. After doffing, HCWs were scanned for fluorescence and swabbed for MS2. MS2 detection was performed using reverse transcriptase PCR. The donning and doffing processes were videotaped, and protocol deviations were recorded.RESULTSOverall, 27% of EVD PPE HCWs and 50% of CP PPE HCWs made ≥1 protocol deviation while donning, and 100% of EVD PPE HCWs and 67% of CP PPE HCWs made ≥1 protocol deviation while doffing (P=.02). The median number of doffing protocol deviations among EVD PPE HCWs was 4, versus 1 among CP PPE HCWs. Also, 15 EVD PPE protocol deviations were committed by doffing assistants and/or trained observers. Fluorescence was detected on 8 EVD PPE HCWs (44%) and 5 CP PPE HCWs (28%), most commonly on hands. MS2 was recovered from 2 EVD PPE HCWs (11%) and 3 CP PPE HCWs (17%).CONCLUSIONSProtocol deviations were common during both EVD and CP PPE doffing, and some deviations during EVD PPE doffing were committed by the HCW doffing assistant and/or the trained observer. Self-contamination was common. PPE donning/doffing are complex and deserve additional study.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1077–1083

scholarly journals Post exposure prophylaxis for HIV among healthcare workers due to occupational exposure: a record based study at a tertiary care teaching hospital of Kolkata

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 2503
Author(s):  
Paramita Sarkar ◽  
Saibendu Kumar Lahiri
Keyword(s):  
Occupational Exposure ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Occupational Exposures ◽  
Post Exposure Prophylaxis ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Skin Mucus ◽  
Needle Stick ◽  
Post Exposure ◽  
Exposure Prophylaxis

Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) regularly face the risk of exposure to sharp injuries and splashes as an occupational hazard, which presents major risk for acquiring blood-borne infectious agents like human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) which can be minimized by taking post exposure prophylaxis (PEP) measures. There are limited studies from India documenting details of PEP for HIV. This record-based study aimed to determine the occurrence of needle stick injuries (NSIs) and other high-risk occupational exposures to blood and body fluids (BBFs) among HCWs in a tertiary care hospital, Kolkata. We aimed to study details of PEP regimens used among HCWs exposed to HIV.Methods: Hospital record was analyzed from reported incidences of occupational exposures to BBFs occurred during the period of October 2013 to March 2019. Information on self-reported incidence of occupational exposure, and post-exposure management were collected.Results: A total of 105 incidents of occupational exposure were registered during study period. Interns (37, 35.2%) were most frequently exposed, followed by physicians (22, 21.0%) and nurse (21, 20.0%). 88 (83.8%) of the personnel sustained NSIs, and 17 (7.2%) had splashes to skin, mucus membranes. There was no significant difference between subjects with splashes to skin, mucus membranes and needle-stick cases regarding discontinuation of post exposure prophylaxis (PEP) (11.8% versus 19.3%, p<0.548). No cases of sero-conversion were reported.Conclusions: In spite of high incidences of exposures to HIV source, good efficacy of PEP was observed with no sero-conversion. PEP for HIV was well tolerated. Study emphasized the need for creating awareness about timely reporting of incidence.

scholarly journals An outbreak caused by the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant (B.1.617.2) in a secondary care hospital in Finland, May 2021

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (30) ◽  
Author(s):  
Iivo Hetemäki ◽  
Sohvi Kääriäinen ◽  
Pirjo Alho ◽  
Janne Mikkola ◽  
Carita Savolainen-Kopra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Secondary Care ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
National Guidelines ◽  
Staff Members ◽  
Care Facilities ◽  
Permanent Staff

An outbreak caused by the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant (B.1.617.2) spread from one inpatient in a secondary care hospital to three primary care facilities, resulting in 58 infections including 18 deaths in patients and 45 infections in healthcare workers (HCW). Only one of the deceased cases was fully vaccinated. Transmission occurred despite the use of personal protective equipment by the HCW, as advised in national guidelines, and a high two-dose COVID-19 vaccination coverage among permanent staff members in the COVID-19 cohort ward.

scholarly journals Healthcare worker perception of a global outbreak of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) and personal protective equipment: Survey of a pediatric tertiary-care hospital

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Pierre-Philippe Piché-Renaud ◽  
Helen E. Groves ◽  
Taito Kitano ◽  
Callum Arnold ◽  
Angela Thomas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Routine Care ◽  
Infection Prevention And Control ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Modes Of Transmission ◽  
Novel Coronavirus

Abstract Objective: In this study, we aimed to capture perspectives of healthcare workers (HCWs) on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and infection prevention and control (IPAC) measures implemented during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design: A cross-sectional survey of HCWs. Participants: HCWs from the Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada. Intervention: A self-administered survey was distributed to HCWs. We analyzed factors influencing HCW knowledge and self-reported use of personal protective equipment (PPE), concerns about contracting COVID-19 and acceptance of the recommended IPAC precautions for COVID-19. Results: In total, 175 HCWs completed the survey between March 6 and March 10: 35 staff physicians (20%), 24 residents or fellows (14%), 72 nurses (41%), 14 respiratory therapists (8%), 14 administration staff (8%), and 14 other employees (8%). Most of the respondents were from the emergency department (n = 58, 33%) and the intensive care unit (n = 58, 33%). Only 86 respondents (50%) identified the correct donning order; only 60 (35%) identified the correct doffing order; but the majority (n = 113, 70%) indicated the need to wash their hands immediately prior to removal of their mask and eye protection. Also, 91 (54%) respondents felt comfortable with recommendations for droplet and/or contact precautions for routine care of patients with COVID-19. HCW occupation and concerns about contracting COVID-19 outside work were associated with nonacceptance of the recommendations (P = .016 and P = .036 respectively). Conclusion: As part of their pandemic response plans, healthcare institutions should have ongoing training for HCWs that focus on appropriate PPE doffing and discussions around modes of transmission of COVID-19.

scholarly journals Frontline healthcare workers’ experiences with personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: a rapid qualitative appraisal

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e046199
Author(s):  
Katarina Hoernke ◽  
Nehla Djellouli ◽  
Lily Andrews ◽  
Sasha Lewis-Jackson ◽  
Louisa Manby ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
National Level ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Patients At Risk ◽  
Multiple Challenges ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Frontline Healthcare Workers

ObjectivesTo report frontline healthcare workers’ (HCWs) experiences with personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. To understand HCWs’ fears and concerns surrounding PPE, their experiences following its guidance and how these affected their perceived ability to deliver care during the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignA rapid qualitative appraisal study combining three sources of data: semistructured in-depth telephone interviews with frontline HCWs (n=46), media reports (n=39 newspaper articles and 145 000 social media posts) and government PPE policies (n=25).ParticipantsInterview participants were HCWs purposively sampled from critical care, emergency and respiratory departments as well as redeployed HCWs from primary, secondary and tertiary care centres across the UK.ResultsA major concern was running out of PPE, putting HCWs and patients at risk of infection. Following national level guidance was often not feasible when there were shortages, leading to reuse and improvisation of PPE. Frequently changing guidelines generated confusion and distrust. PPE was reserved for high-risk secondary care settings and this translated into HCWs outside these settings feeling inadequately protected. Participants were concerned about differential access to adequate PPE, particularly for women and Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic HCWs. Participants continued delivering care despite the physical discomfort, practical problems and communication barriers associated with PPE use.ConclusionThis study found that frontline HCWs persisted in caring for their patients despite multiple challenges including inappropriate provision of PPE, inadequate training and inconsistent guidance. In order to effectively care for patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, frontline HCWs need appropriate provision of PPE, training in its use as well as comprehensive and consistent guidance. These needs must be addressed in order to protect the health and well-being of the most valuable healthcare resource in the COVID-19 pandemic: our HCWs.

scholarly journals A COVID-19 exposure at a dental clinic where healthcare workers routinely use particulate filtering respirators

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Do Sup Kim ◽  
Jae-Hoon Ko ◽  
Kyong Ran Peck ◽  
Jin Yang Baek ◽  
Hee-Won Moon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Care ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Close Contact ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Respiratory Syndrome Virus ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Dental Clinic ◽  
Routine Patient Care ◽  
Dental Procedures

Abstract Back ground. Asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients produce a considerable amount of virus and transmit severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) through close contact. Preventing in-hospital transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is challenging, since symptom-based screening protocols may miss asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic patients. In particular, dental health workers (HCWs) are at high risk of exposure, as face-to-face contact and exposure to oral secretions is unavoidable. We report exposure of HCWs during dental procedures on a mild symptomatic COVID-19 patient. Methods. A 32-year old male visited a dental clinic at a tertiary care hospital. He experienced mild cough, which started three days before the dental visit, but did not report his symptom during the entrance screening. He underwent several dental procedures and imaging for orthognathic surgery without wearing a mask. Seven HCWs were closely exposed to the patient during dental procedures that could have generated droplets and aerosols. One HCW had close contact with the patient during radiologic exams, and seven HCWs had casual contact. All HCWs wore particulate filtering respirators with 94% filter capacity and gloves, but none wore eye protection or gowns. The next day, the patient experienced dysgeusia and was diagnosed with COVID-19 with high viral load. Results. All HCWs who had close contact with the patient were quarantined for 14 days, and polymerase chain reaction and antibody tests for SARS-CoV-2 were negative. Conclusion. This exposure event suggests the protective effect of particulate filtering respirators in dental clinics. The appropriate personal protective equipment for routine patient care during COVID-19 pandemic should be established. The appropriate personal protective equipment for routine patient care during COVID-19 pandemic should be established.

scholarly journals Practice among Healthcare Workers Regarding the Use of Respiratory Protective Equipment during COVID-19 Pandemic in a Tertiary Care Center: A Descriptive Cross-sectional Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 59 (236) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sani Sipai ◽  
Bishnu Rath Giri ◽  
Sudhir Sapkota ◽  
Ram Hari Chapagain ◽  
Santosh Manandhar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Care Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Tertiary Care Center ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional

Introduction: Healthcare workers are always at the risk of exposure to different diseases like respiratory illness including COVID-19. Using appropriate face mask or respiratory protective equipment correctly can prevent transmission of diseases from and to healthcare workers while caring for patients. The study aimed to find out the practice regarding use of face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic in a tertiary care center. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital during June-July 2020 after receiving ethical approval from the review committee regarding practice of use of face masks. Convenience sampling method was used and a sample size of 162 was taken. Descriptive statistical analysis was done. Point estimate at 95% Confidence Interval was calculated along with frequency and proportion for binary data. Results: Among 162 participants, 123 (75.9%) knew the correct way of using the masks (72.5-79.3 at 95% Confidence Interval). Conclusions: In this study regarding practice of use of face masks, most of the healthcare workers knew the correct way of using masks and practised hygiene before and after using masks.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document