scholarly journals Silk fabric as a protective barrier for personal protective equipment and as a functional material for face coverings during the COVID-19 pandemic

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam F. Parlin ◽  
Samuel M. Stratton ◽  
Theresa M. Culley ◽  
Patrick A. Guerra
Keyword(s):  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Silk Fabric ◽  
Functional Material ◽  
Protective Barrier ◽  
Hydrophobic Barrier ◽  
Surgical Masks ◽  
Single Use ◽  
Do It Yourself ◽  
Clinical Conditions ◽  
N95 Respirators

AbstractBackgroundThe worldwide shortage of single-use N95 respirators and surgical masks due to the COVID-19 pandemic has forced many health care personnel to prolong the use of their existing equipment as much as possible. In many cases, workers cover respirators with available masks in an attempt to extend their effectiveness against the virus. Due to low mask supplies, many people instead are using face coverings improvised from common fabrics. Our goal was to determine what fabrics would be most effective in both practices.Methods and findingsWe examined the hydrophobicity of fabrics (silk, cotton, polyester), as measured by their resistance to the penetration of small and aerosolized water droplets, an important transmission avenue for the virus causing COVID-19. We also examined the breathability of these fabrics and their ability to maintain hydrophobicity despite undergoing repeated cleaning. Tests were done when fabrics were fashioned as an overlaying barrier and also when constructed as do-it-yourself face coverings. As a protective barrier and face covering, silk is more effective at impeding the penetration and absorption of droplets due to its greater hydrophobicity relative to other tested fabrics. Silk face coverings repelled droplets as well as masks, but unlike masks they are hydrophobic and can be readily sterilized for immediate reuse.ConclusionsSilk is an effective hydrophobic barrier to droplets, more breathable than other fabrics that trap humidity, and are readily re-useable via cleaning. Therefore, silk can serve as an effective material for protecting respirators under clinical conditions and as a material for face coverings.

RESEARCH: Dry Heat Processing of Single-Use Respirators and Surgical Masks

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (6) ◽  
pp. 410-416
Author(s):  
Joyce M. Hansen ◽  
Scott Weiss ◽  
Terra A. Kremer ◽  
Myrelis Aguilar ◽  
Gerald McDonnell
Keyword(s):  
Microbial Contamination ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Airborne Particles ◽  
Heat Processing ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Facilities ◽  
Dry Heat ◽  
Surgical Masks ◽  
Single Use

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, has challenged healthcare providers in maintaining the supply of critical personal protective equipment, including single-use respirators and surgical masks. Single-use respirators and surgical masks can reduce risks from the inhalation of airborne particles and microbial contamination. The recent high-volume demand for single-use respirators and surgical masks has resulted in many healthcare facilities considering processing to address critical shortages. The dry heat process of 80°C (176°F) for two hours (120 min) has been confirmed to be an appropriate method for single-use respirator and surgical mask processing.

scholarly journals Low-cost enhancement of facial mask filtration to prevent transmission of COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 169-177
Author(s):  
Hari Bhimaraju ◽  
Nitish Nag ◽  
Ramesh Jain
Keyword(s):  
Activated Carbon ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Viral Transmission ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Air Filters ◽  
Facial Mask ◽  
Surgical Masks ◽  
Aerosol Chamber ◽  
N95 Respirators

The use of face masks is recommended worldwide to reduce the spread of COVID-19. A plethora of facial coverings and respirators, both commercial and homemade, pervade the market, but the true filtration capabilities of many homemade measures against the virus are unclear and continue to be unexplored. In this work, we compare the following masks in keeping out particulate matter below 2.5 microns in decreasing order of their efficacy: N95 respirators, cloth masks with activated carbon air filters, cloth masks with HVAC air filters, surgical masks, heavily-starched cloth masks, lightly-starched cloth masks, and regular cloth masks. The experiments utilize an inhalation system and aerosol chamber to simulate a masked individual respiring aerosolized air. COVID-19 disproportionately affects people in low-income communities, who often lack the resources to acquire appropriate personal protective equipment and tend to lack the flexibility to shelter in place due to their public-facing occupations. This work tests low-cost enhancements to homemade masks to assist these communities in making better masks to reduce viral transmission. Experimental results demonstrate that the filtration efficacy of cloth masks with either a light or heavy starch can approach the performance of much costlier masks. This discovery supports the idea of low-cost enhancements to reduce transmission and protect individuals from contracting COVID-19.

scholarly journals UV Sterilization of Personal Protective Equipment with Idle Laboratory Biosafety Cabinets During the COVID-19 Pandemic

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Kyle J. Card ◽  
Dena Crozier ◽  
Andrew Dhawan ◽  
Mina N. Dinh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Uv Radiation ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Cleveland Clinic ◽  
The United States ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Common Element ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Surgical Masks ◽  
N95 Respirators ◽  
Uv C

ABSTRACTDISCLAIMERThis article does not represent the official recommendation of the Cleveland Clinic or Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, nor has it yet been peer reviewed. We are releasing it early, pre-peer review, to allow for quick dissemination/vetting by the scientific/clinical community given the necessity for rapid conservation of personal protective equipment (PPE) during this dire global situation. We welcome feedback from the community.Personal protective equipment (PPE), including face shields, surgical masks, and N95 respirators, is crucially important to the safety of both patients and medical personnel, particularly in the event of an infectious pandemic. As the incidence of Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) increases exponentially in the United States and worldwide, healthcare provider demand for these necessities is currently outpacing supply. As such, strategies to extend the lifespan of the supply of medical equipment as safely as possible are critically important. In the midst of the current pandemic, there has been a concerted effort to identify viable ways to conserve PPE, including decontamination after use. Some hospitals have already begun using UV-C light to decontaminate N95 respirators and other PPE, but many lack the space or equipment to implement existing protocols. In this study, we outline a procedure by which PPE may be decontaminated using ultraviolet (UV) radiation in biosafety cabinets (BSCs), a common element of many academic, public health, and hospital laboratories, and discuss the dose ranges needed for effective decontamination of critical PPE. We further discuss obstacles to this approach including the possibility that the UV radiation levels vary within BSCs. Effective decontamination of N95 respirator masks or surgical masks requires UV-C doses of greater than 1 Jcm−2, which would take a minimum of 4.3 hours per side when placing the N95 at the bottom of the BSCs tested in this study. Elevating the N95 mask by 48 cm (so that it lies 19 cm from the top of the BSC) would enable the delivery of germicidal doses of UV-C in 62 minutes per side. Effective decontamination of face shields likely requires a much lower UV-C dose, and may be achieved by placing the face shields at the bottom of the BSC for 20 minutes per side. Our results are intended to provide support to healthcare organizations looking for alternative methods to extend their reserves of PPE. We recognize that institutions will require robust quality control processes to guarantee the efficacy of any implemented decontamination protocol. We also recognize that in certain situations such institutional resources may not be available; while we subscribe to the general principle that some degree of decontamination is preferable to re-use without decontamination, we would strongly advise that in such cases at least some degree of on-site verification of UV dose delivery be performed.

scholarly journals The use of germicidal ultraviolet light, vaporised hydrogen peroxide and dry heat to decontaminate face masks and filtering respirators contaminated with a SARS-CoV-2 surrogate virus

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louisa F Ludwig-Begall ◽  
Constance Wielick ◽  
Lorene Dams ◽  
Hans Nauwynck ◽  
Pierre-Francois Demeuldre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heat Treatment ◽  
Uv Irradiation ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Stable Model ◽  
Dry Heat ◽  
Surgical Masks ◽  
Single Use ◽  
Dry Heat Treatment ◽  
Respiratory Coronavirus ◽  
Porcine Respiratory

Background In the context of the ongoing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, the supply of personal protective equipment remains under severe strain. To address this issue, re-use of surgical face masks and filtering facepiece respirators has been recommended; prior decontamination is paramount to their re-use. Aim We aim to provide information on the effects of three decontamination procedures on porcine respiratory coronavirus (PRCV)-contaminated masks and respirators, presenting a stable model for infectious coronavirus decontamination of these typically single-use-only products. Methods Surgical masks and filtering facepiece respirator coupons and straps were inoculated with infectious PRCV and submitted to three decontamination treatments, UV irradiation, vaporised H2O2, and dry heat treatment. Viruses were recovered from sample materials and viral titres were measured in swine testicle cells. Findings UV irradiation, vaporised H2O2 and dry heat reduced infectious PRCV by more than three orders of magnitude on mask and respirator coupons and rendered it undetectable in all decontamination assays. Conclusion This is the first description of stable disinfection of face masks and filtering facepiece respirators contaminated with an infectious SARS-CoV-2 surrogate using UV irradiation, vaporised H2O2 and dry heat treatment. The three methods permit demonstration of a loss of infectivity by more than three orders of magnitude of an infectious coronavirus in line with the FDA policy regarding face masks and respirators. It presents advantages of uncomplicated manipulation and utilisation in a BSL2 facility, therefore being easily adaptable to other respirator and mask types.

scholarly journals Assessment of N95 respirator decontamination and re-use for SARS-CoV-2

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Fischer ◽  
Dylan H. Morris ◽  
Neeltje van Doremalen ◽  
Shanda Sarchette ◽  
M. Jeremiah Matson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hydrogen Peroxide ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Nosocomial Transmission ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Respiratory Protection ◽  
Single Use ◽  
N95 Respirators

The unprecedented pandemic of SARS-CoV-2 has created worldwide shortages of personal protective equipment, in particular respiratory protection such as N95 respirators. SARS-CoV-2 transmission is frequently occurring in hospital settings, with numerous reported cases of nosocomial transmission highlighting the vulnerability of healthcare workers. In general, N95 respirators are designed for single use prior to disposal. Here, we have analyzed four readily available and often used decontamination methods: UV, 70% ethanol, 70C heat and vaporized hydrogen peroxide for inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 on N95 respirators. Equally important we assessed the function of the N95 respirators after multiple wear and decontamination sessions.

scholarly journals A69 THE EFFECT OF COVID-19 PANDEMIC ON CURRENT AND FUTURE ENDOSCOPIC PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT PRACTICES: A NATIONAL SURVEY OF 77 ENDOSCOPISTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 31-32
Author(s):  
W Sun ◽  
M El Hafid ◽  
J Dang ◽  
V Mocanu ◽  
G Lutzak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Eye Protection ◽  
Individual Outcomes ◽  
Canadian Association ◽  
Surgical Masks ◽  
General Surgeons ◽  
N95 Respirators ◽  
Hospital Acquired

Abstract Background Personal protective equipment (PPE) guidelines serve to protect healthcare providers and patients from harmful biohazards. With the rise of the 2019 SARS-CoV-2 disease (COVID-19), many institutions have mandated strictly enforced endoscopic PPE guidelines. We currently do not know how current practitioners perceive these mandates or how they will influence their practice long-term. Aims We aimed to survey the PPE practices among endoscopists across Canada and compare their perceived differences in practice between the pre- and post-COVID-19 pandemic eras. We hypothesize that the PPE guidelines during the pandemic will influence changes in PPE practices in endoscopy. Methods A 74-item questionnaire was emailed from June 2020 to September 2020 to all members of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterologists and the Canadian Association of General Surgeons through newsletters. The survey was created by expert consensus and distributed using the REDCap software. Survey questions collected basic demographics and differences between PPE practices pre- and post-COVID-19 pandemic eras. PPE practices were categorized into four endoscopic procedure types: diagnostic or therapeutic, and upper or lower gastrointestinal endoscopy. Individual outcomes were reported as rates, or ranges when evaluating for all procedure types. Results A total of 77 respondents completed the survey with the majority of respondents aged 40–49 (34 [44.2%]) and identifying as Gastroenterologists (54 [70.1%]). Gender was evenly split (38 females [49.4%] versus 39 males [50.6%]). In the pre-pandemic era, the majority of endoscopists wore gowns (91.0–93.9%) and all endoscopists wore gloves (100%). However, the majority of endoscopists did not wear surgical masks (20.9%-31.3%), N95 respirators (1.5%-3.2%), face shields (13.4%-33.9%), eye protection (13.4%-21.3%), or hair protection (11.1%-12.5%). In the post-pandemic era, endoscopists reported a plan to dramatically change their pre-pandemic practices and adopt current PPE mandates. All endoscopists reported a plan to fully gown and glove (100%) with the majority reporting they will continue wearing surgical masks (87.7%-90.5%), face shields (57.8%-75.0%), and hair protection (50.8%-53.8%). However, the majority reported a plan to decrease universal use of N95 respirators (6.5%-23.7%) or eye protection (36.5%-40.0%). Over half of the respondents reported changing their practice from no masking pre-pandemic to implementing routine masking. Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the attitudes of many endoscopists regarding future PPE use in routine endoscopy. Ongoing studies comparing the rates of transmission of hospital-acquired infections in the setting of endoscopy are needed to develop a new post-pandemic PPE consensus. Funding Agencies None

scholarly journals Personal protective equipment for reducing the risk of COVID-19 infection among healthcare workers involved in emergency trauma surgery during the pandemic: an umbrella review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dylan Paul Griswold ◽  
Andres Gempeler ◽  
Angelos Kolias ◽  
Peter Hutchinson ◽  
Andres Rubiano
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Trauma Surgery ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Risk Environments ◽  
Surgical Masks ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
N95 Respirators

Objective: The objective of this review was to summarise the effects of different personal protective equipment (PPE) for reducing the risk of COVID-19 infection in health personnel caring for patients undergoing trauma surgery. The purpose of the review was to inform recommendations for rational use of PPE for emergency surgery staff, particularly in low resources environments where PPE shortages and high costs are expected to hamper the safety of healthcare workers (HCWs) and affect the care of trauma patients. Introduction: Many healthcare facilities in low-and middle-income countries are inadequately resourced. COVID-19 has the potential to decimate these already strained surgical healthcare services unless health systems take stringent measures to protect healthcare workers from viral exposure. Inclusion criteria: This review included systematic reviews, experimental and observational studies evaluating the effect of different PPE on the risk of COVID-19 infection in HCWs involved in emergency trauma surgery. Indirect evidence from other healthcare settings was considered, as well as evidence from other viral outbreaks summarised and discussed for the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We conducted searches in the LOVE (Living OVerview of Evidence) platform for COVID-19, a system that performs automated regular searches in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and over thirty other sources. The risk of bias assessment of the included studies was planned with the AMSTAR II tool for systematic reviews, the RoBII tool for randomised controlled trials, and the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomised studies. Data were extracted using a standardised data extraction tool and summarised narratively. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach for grading the certainty of the evidence was followed. Results: We identified 17 systematic reviews that fulfilled our selection criteria and were included for synthesis. We did not identify randomised controlled trials during COVID-19 or studies additional to those included in the reviews that discussed other similar viral respiratory illnesses. Conclusions: The use of PPE drastically reduces the risk of COVID-19 compared with no mask use in HCWs in the hospital setting. N95 and N95 equivalent respirators provided more protection and were found to halve the risk of COVID-19 contagion in HCWs from moderate and high-risk environments. Eye protection also offers additional security and is associated with reduced incidence of contagion. These effects apply to emergency trauma care. Decontamination and reuse appear as feasible, cost-effective measures that would likely help overcome PPE shortages and enhance the allocation of limited resources. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS There is high certainty that the use of N95 respirators and surgical masks are associated with a reduced risk of coronaviruses respiratory illness when compared with no mask use. In moderate to high-risk environments, especially in aerosol-generating procedures, N95 respirators are associated with a more significant reduction in risk of COVID-19 infection compared with surgical masks. Eye protection also reduces the risk of contagion. Decontamination of masks and respirators with ultraviolet germicidal irradiation, vaporous hydrogen peroxide, or dry heat is effective and does not affect PPE performance or fit.

scholarly journals Low-Cost Enhancement of Facial Mask Filtration to Prevent Transmission of COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hari Bhimaraju ◽  
Nitish Nag ◽  
Ramesh Jain
Keyword(s):  
Activated Carbon ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Viral Transmission ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Air Filters ◽  
Facial Mask ◽  
Surgical Masks ◽  
Aerosol Chamber ◽  
N95 Respirators

The use of face masks is recommended worldwide to reduce the spread of COVID-19. A plethora of facial coverings and respirators, both commercial and homemade, pervade the market, but the true filtration capabilities of many homemade measures against the virus are unclear and continue to be unexplored. In this work, we compare the efficacy of the following masks in keeping out particulate matter below 2.5 microns: N95 respirators, surgical masks, cloth masks, cloth masks with activated carbon air filters, cloth masks with HVAC air filters, lightly starch-enhanced cloth masks, and heavily-starched cloth masks. The experiments utilize an inhalation system and aerosol chamber to simulate a masked individual respiring aerosolized air. COVID-19 disproportionately affects people in low-income communities, who often lack the resources to acquire appropriate personal protective equipment and tend to lack the flexibility to shelter in place due to their public-facing occupations. This work tests low-cost enhancements to homemade masks to assist these communities in making better masks to reduce viral transmission. Experimental results demonstrate that the filtration efficacy of cloth masks with either a light or heavy starch can approach the performance of much costlier masks. This discovery supports the idea of low-cost enhancements to reduce transmission and protect individuals from contracting COVID-19.

scholarly journals Assessment of N95 respirator decontamination and re-use for SARS-CoV-2

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Fischer ◽  
Dylan H. Morris ◽  
Neeltje van Doremalen ◽  
Shanda Sarchette ◽  
Jeremiah Matson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hydrogen Peroxide ◽  
Uv Radiation ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Nosocomial Transmission ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Respiratory Protection ◽  
Single Use ◽  
N95 Respirators

The unprecedented pandemic of SARS-CoV-2 has created worldwide shortages of personal protective equipment, in particular respiratory protection such as N95 respirators. SARS-CoV-2 transmission is frequently occurring in hospital settings, with numerous reported cases of nosocomial transmission highlighting the vulnerability of healthcare workers. In general, N95 respirators are designed for single use prior to disposal. Several groups have addressed the potential for re-use of N95 respirators from a mechanical or from a decontamination perspective. Here, we analyzed four different decontamination methods – UV radiation (260 – 285 nm), 70ºC heat, 70% ethanol and vaporized hydrogen peroxide (VHP) – for their ability to reduce contamination with infectious SARS-CoV-2 and their effect on N95 respirator function.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document