scholarly journals Perspectives COVID-19 and PPE in context: an interview with China

2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 480-482
Author(s):  
Jessica Harvey

Abstract The author aims to depict the current COVID-19 pandemic and personal protective equipment (PPE) crisis in the UK. The current situation is put into context exploring the history of global outbreaks of infectious disease and what has been learnt. These lessons are then applied and weighed against the recent response to coronavirus. An in depth interview with a UK biomedical SME based in Shanghai, China is reported in order to inform future procurement of PPE. It is hoped that an appreciation of the dynamic nature of the market will allow adaptations to be made in order to secure reliable supply chains moving forwards.

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 2627
Author(s):  
Pierre-Edouard Fournier ◽  
Sophie Edouard ◽  
Nathalie Wurtz ◽  
Justine Raclot ◽  
Marion Bechet ◽  
...  

The Méditerranée Infection University Hospital Institute (IHU) is located in a recent building, which includes experts on a wide range of infectious disease. The IHU strategy is to develop innovative tools, including epidemiological monitoring, point-of-care laboratories, and the ability to mass screen the population. In this study, we review the strategy and guidelines proposed by the IHU and its application to the COVID-19 pandemic and summarise the various challenges it raises. Early diagnosis enables contagious patients to be isolated and treatment to be initiated at an early stage to reduce the microbial load and contagiousness. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we had to deal with a shortage of personal protective equipment and reagents and a massive influx of patients. Between 27 January 2020 and 5 January 2021, 434,925 nasopharyngeal samples were tested for the presence of SARS-CoV-2. Of them, 12,055 patients with COVID-19 were followed up in our out-patient clinic, and 1888 patients were hospitalised in the Institute. By constantly adapting our strategy to the ongoing situation, the IHU has succeeded in expanding and upgrading its equipment and improving circuits and flows to better manage infected patients.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin N. Danson ◽  
Malcolm White ◽  
John R. M. Barr ◽  
Thomas Bett ◽  
Peter Blyth ◽  
...  

Abstract The first demonstration of laser action in ruby was made in 1960 by T. H. Maiman of Hughes Research Laboratories, USA. Many laboratories worldwide began the search for lasers using different materials, operating at different wavelengths. In the UK, academia, industry and the central laboratories took up the challenge from the earliest days to develop these systems for a broad range of applications. This historical review looks at the contribution the UK has made to the advancement of the technology, the development of systems and components and their exploitation over the last 60 years.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S305-S305
Author(s):  
Se Yoon Park ◽  
Bongyoung Kim ◽  
Dong Sik Jung ◽  
Sook In Jung ◽  
Won Sup Oh ◽  
...  

Abstract Background This study aimed to investigate psychological distress among infectious disease (ID) physicians during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in the Republic of Korea. Methods Using an online-based survey link sent via text message and email, we conducted a survey from April 21 to 25, 2020, targeting all ID physicians currently working in ID (n = 265). The questionnaire was based on the Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey and the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scales, and information was collected on factors protecting against psychological distress and difficulties in relation to COVID-19. Results Of 265 ID physicians, 115 (43.3%) responded, showing burnout (97, 90.4%), depression (20, 17.4%), anxiety (23, 20.0%), and stress (5, 4.3%). There were no differences in terms of distress between ID physicians who were directly involved in the care of patients with COVID-19 or not (Table 1). Greater than 50% of physicians valued their work and felt recognized by others, whereas < 10% indicated that sufficient human and financial support and private time had been provided during the outbreak. The most challenging issues concerned a lack of human resources for COVID-19 treatment or infection control, a shortage of personal protective equipment or airborne infection isolation rooms, pressure for research, and lack of guidelines for COVID-19 management (Figure 1). Table 1. Figure 1. Difficulties in response to the COVID-19 outbreak. Abbreviations: COVID-19, coronavirus disease 19; HCWs, healthcare workers; ICPs, infection control practitioners; IRB, Institutional Review Board; PPE, personal protective equipment Conclusion During the COVID-19 outbreak in the ROK, most respondents reported psychological distress. Preparing strategies for infectious disease outbreaks that support ID physicians is essential. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures


2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 76-80
Author(s):  
Drew Payne ◽  
Martin Peache

COVID-19 has changed the landscape of healthcare in the UK since the first confirmed case in January 2020. Most of the resources have been directed towards reducing transmission in the hospital and clinical environment, but little is known about what community nurses can do to reduce the risk when they nurse people in their own homes? This article looks at what COVID-19 is, how it is spread and how health professionals are at an increased risk from aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs). There is also a discussion on the benefit of mask usage. It defines what AGPs are, which clinical procedures are AGPs, including ones performed in the community setting, and which identified clinical practices that have been mistaken for AGPs. There is also a discussion on the suitability of performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). It also describes how to reduce the risk by the use of full personal protective equipment (PPE) and other strategies when AGPs are performed in a patient's home. It ends with general advice about managing the risk of COVID-19 transmission with patients in their homes.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (34) ◽  
pp. 27-39
Author(s):  
Abdurrahman Kharbat ◽  
Adin Mizer ◽  
Mimi Zumwalt

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected citizens and healthcare workers worldwide due to a number of important factors. The transmission of the SARS CoV-2 microorganism, the pathogen that causes COVID-19 infection, occurs through droplet and aerosol spread due to coughs and sneezes from infected patients. A panicked public began hoarding medical supplies and personal protective equipment (PPE), leaving healthcare workers to care for patients without adequate protection. A literature review was conducted to better understand the options available to hospital and healthcare system administrators as they develop necessary protocols for the conservation and possible reuse of PPE. This review is based upon the peer-reviewed studies of various scientific investigators, biotechnology researchers, governmental agency health officials, including meta-analyses, preliminary/pilot studies, and policy statements. Current findings indicate that extended usage of N95 respirators is practical since there are methods available for the decontamination/repeated use of N95 respirators. In evaluating the efficacy of such methods, the safety of healthcare workers is important in deciding which method to recommend. Available evidence supports the use of the Bioquell Hydrogen Peroxide Vapor (HPV) system for decontaminating N95 respirators. Information on other PPE will also be discussed about more specific items. Informed decisions regarding the policies of hospitals and healthcare systems must be considered, and with the safety of healthcare workers in mind, both factors influenced the recommendations made in this comprehensive review.


2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 168-174
Author(s):  
Drew Payne ◽  
Martin Peache

Infection control is the responsibility of all nurses, but, traditionally, it has been seen as a priority only in hospitals. Infection control does not stop when a patient is discharged home, but should be practiced wherever clinical care takes place. Community nurses face a unique challenge as they work in patients' homes, and they must manage infection control in that unique environment. This article looks at practical ways to maintain infection control in patients' homes. It covers hand hygiene and personal protective equipment (PPE), including the five moments of hand hygiene, appropriate hand hygiene, the use of all PPE and when gloves are required and when they are not. It also discusses managing clinical equipment, both that taken into the home and that left with a patient, including decontamination, safe storage of sharps and waste management. It touches upon what can be done in a patient's home to reduce the risk of contamination, as well as infectious disease management, including specimens and wound infection management. Lastly, it talks about cross-infection and why staff health is also important.


2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Melissa Loh ◽  
Karthikeyan Iyengar ◽  
William YC Loh

The effect of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic on the NHS in the UK has been profound and unprecedented. Many surgical specialities, including dentistry, throughout the country have not been exempt from this effect. As there are many aerosol-generating procedures and aerosol-generating exposures in surgical specialities, there has been a substantial cancellation of elective treatment. This has been in part because of the limited availability of personal protective equipment for surgeons as this is being use elsewhere by clinicians to aid the reduction of viral spread in the community. As the UK is preparing to emerge from the ‘lockdown’ during the pandemic, restarting elective surgical and dental treatment is an expected challenge. This article looks at the possible roadmap to recovery of elective surgical management and dentistry, taking into consideration possible predicted further peaks and troughs of COVID-19 infections.


2007 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Hildebrand ◽  
Anthony Bleetman

AbstractBackground:In recent years, the perceived threat of chemical terrorism has increased. It is hoped that teaching civilians how to behave during a chemical incident will decrease the number of “worried well” patients at hospitals, reduce secondary contamination, and increase compliance with the instructions of emergency services. The governments of the United Kingdom and Israel sent booklets to every household in their respective countries. In Israel, the civilian population was issued chemical personal protective equipment (chemical personal protective equipment).Methods:The effectiveness of these public education programs was assessed using a scenario-based questionnaire that was distributed to 100 respondents in Birmingham, UK and Jerusalem, Israel. Respondents were asked how they would behave in three deliberate chemical release scenarios and how they would seek information and help.Results:Only 33% of the UK respondents and 22% of the Israeli respondents recalled reading the government booklets. When asked what they would do after being contaminated in a deliberate release, approximately half of the respondents ranked seeking medical care at a hospital as the most appropriate action.The preferred sources of information in the wake of a chemical strike were (in descending order): radio, television, and the Internet. Approximately half of the respondents would call emergency services for information. Forty-one percent of the UK respondents and 33% of Israeli respondents stated that they either would call or go to the nearest hospital to seek information.Conclusions:The public information campaigns in both countries have had a limited impact. Many citizens claimed they would self-present to the nearest hospital following a chemical attack rather than waiting for the emergency services. A similar response was witnessed in the Sarin attacks in Tokyo and the 1991 Scud missile attacks in Israel.Current UK doctrine mandates that specialist decontamination teams be deployed to the scene of a chemical release. However, this takes >1 hour, and it requires at least 30 minutes to don hospital chemical personal protective equipment. Therefore, it is imperative that hospitals are equipped to cope with unannounced self-presenters after a chemical attack. This requires chemical personal protective equipment and protocols that are easier to use.


Eye ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (7) ◽  
pp. 1224-1228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy-lee Shirodkar ◽  
Ian De Silva ◽  
Seema Verma ◽  
Sarah Anderson ◽  
Polly Dickerson ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Craig ◽  
Julia Clark ◽  
Mike Starr ◽  
Joanne Grindlay ◽  
Andrew Tagg ◽  
...  

Abstract ObjectivesTo determine recommendations for the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) based on transmission risk for paediatric procedures in the Emergency Department during the COVID-19 pandemic. MethodsTwo survey rounds were conducted in April-May 2020. The survey presented a number of emergency medicine procedures relevant to the care of children, and asked respondents to provide PPE recommendations according to levels of community transmission, and whether or not the child had symptoms of acute respiratory illness. ResultsParticipants were recruited by approaching relevant professional groups, with 15 from the PREDICT network and 12 from the Australasian Society of Infectious Diseases (ASID) Paediatric Infectious Diseases (ANZPID) Group. Airborne PPE is recommended for resuscitative procedures and various respiratory procedures in most situations There were differences in opinion between emergency and paediatric infectious disease specialists with regards to most appropriate PPE for children without symptoms of COVID-19 in a setting of low community transmission, and for procedures involving the head, neck or airway. In general, emergency physicians were more likely to favour airborne PPE than infectious disease specialists. In the setting of high community transmission, there was a stronger tendency to recommend at least droplet precautions for most procedures – regardless of whether or not the child had symptoms. ConclusionsDifferences in PPE recommendations for various paediatric procedures between infectious disease specialists and emergency physicians were identified. Further research is urgently needed to clarify and quantify risks for many common interventions and determine strategies for multidisciplinary consensus regarding future recommendations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document