scholarly journals Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and associated factors in health care workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petros Galanis ◽  
Irene Vraka ◽  
Despoina Fragkou ◽  
Angeliki Bilali ◽  
Daphne Kaitelidou
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Polymerase Chain Reaction Test ◽  
Infection Prevention And Control ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Positive Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Care Workers

SummaryBackgroundHealth care workers (HCWs) represent a high risk population for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.AimTo determine the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among HCWs, and to find out the factors that are associated with this seroprevalence.MethodsThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines were applied for this systematic review and meta-analysis. Databases including PubMed/MEDLINE and pre-print services (medRχiv and bioRχiv) were searched from inception up to August 24, 2020.FindingsForty-nine studies, including 127,480 HCWs met the inclusion criteria. The estimated overall seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among HCWs was 8.7% (95% CI: 6.7-10.9%). Seroprevalence was higher in studies that were conducted in North America (12.7%) compared to those in Europe (8.5%), Africa (8.2), and Asia (4%). Meta-regression showed that increased sensitivity of antibodies test was associated with increased seroprevalence. The following factors were associated with seropositivity: male gender, Black, Asian, and Hispanic HCWs, work in a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) unit, patient-related work, frontline health care workers, health care assistants, personal protective equipment shortage, self-reported belief for previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, previous positive polymerase chain reaction test, and household contact with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients.ConclusionThe seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among HCWs is high. Excellent adherence to infection prevention and control measures, sufficient and adequate personal protective equipment, and early recognition, identification and isolation of HCWs that are infected with SARS-CoV-2 are imperative to decrease the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

scholarly journals Impact of personal protective equipment use on health care workers’ physical health during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petros Galanis ◽  
Irene Vraka ◽  
Despoina Fragkou ◽  
Angeliki Bilali ◽  
Daphne Kaitelidou
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Physical Health ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Care Workers ◽  
The Impact

SummaryBackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, health care workers (HCWs) caring for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in high-risk clinical settings have been obliged to wear personal protective equipment (PPE).AimTo assess the impact of PPE use on HCWs’ physical health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Also, we examined factors related with a greater risk of adverse events among HCWs due to PPE use.MethodsWe applied the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines and the Cochrane criteria for this systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched PubMed, Medline, Scopus, ProQuest, CINAHL and pre-print services (medRxiv) from January 1, 2020 to December 27, 2020.FindingsOur review included 14 studies with 11,746 HCWs from 16 countries. The estimated overall prevalence of adverse events among HCWs was 78% (95% CI: 66.7-87.5%) with a range from 42.8% to 95.1% among studies. The prevalence of adverse events was higher for the studies with poor quality compared to those with moderate quality (83.5% vs. 67.1%), while increased sample size was related with decreased prevalence (p<0.001). The most frequent adverse events were headache (55.9%), dry skin (54.4%), dyspnoea (53.4%), pressure injuries (40.4%), itching (39.8%), hyperhidrosis (38.5%), and dermatitis (31.0%). Among others, the following factors were related with the risk of adverse events among HCWs due to PPE use: female gender, younger age, obesity, diabetes mellitus, smoking pre-existing headache, longer duration of shifts wearing PPE, increased consecutive days with PPE, and increased exposure to confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients.ConclusionThe frequency of adverse events amongst HCWs due to PPE use is very high. Further studies should be conducted since the limitations of this review do not allow us to infer conclusive results especially in case of risk factors for the occurrence of adverse events. Healthcare facilities should take the necessary precautions and change the working conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic to prevent adverse events associated with PPE use and minimize harm to HCWs.

scholarly journals COVID – 19 related knowledge and preventive practices early in the outbreak among health care workers in selected public health facilities of Illu aba Bor and Buno Bedelle zones, Southwest Ethiopia

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dereje Tsegaye ◽  
Muluneh Shuremu ◽  
Dereje Oljira ◽  
Sileshi Dubale ◽  
Getachew Befekadu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Infection Prevention ◽  
Health Facilities ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Southwest Ethiopia ◽  
Preventive Practices ◽  
Care Workers

Abstract Background Novel-coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) disease is currently a worldwide health risk and public health emergency concern. The virus is transmitted from an infected person to another person through close contact and droplets. Frontline health care workers are the most at risk of infection, and so a WHO interim guidance document was issued by the World Health Organization (WHO) which underscores the importance of proper sanitation and waste management practices for COVID- 19 in health-care settings. This study aimed at assessing knowledge and preventive practices towards Covid-19 among health care providers in selected health facilities of Illu Aba Bor and Buno Bedele zones, Southwest Ethiopia. Methods An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted from April to May 2020 among 330 health workers in selected health facilities of Illu Aba Bor and Buno-Bedelle Zones, Southwest Ethiopia. Data were collected using a self-administered structured questionnaire. The collected data were entered into Epidata version 3.1 and exported to SPSS version 23 for analysis. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors of preventive practices towards Covid-19. Statistical significance was declared at a p-value of < 0.05. Result The majority of respondents (93.3%) demonstrated good knowledge of COVID-19, and the mean (SD) knowledge score was 9.04 ± 1.06. Nearly two-thirds (64.2%) of the study participants had good infection prevention practices. Being male (AOR = 3.65, 95% CI: (1.96, 6.80)), education level (AOR = 1.82, 95% CI (1.02, 3.22)), profession (AOR = 3.17, 95% CI (1.08, 9.33)), service year (5–10 years) (AOR = 2.00 (1.02, 3.92)) and more than 10 years (AOR = 3.14 (1.51, 6.52)), availability of personal protective equipment (AOR = 1.96 (1.06, 3.61)) and Knowledge level (AOR = 2.61 (1.48, 4.62)) were independent predictors of COVID-19 preventive practices. Conclusion The overall level of knowledge of HCWs was good. However, the practice was relatively low. Gender, educational status, profession, year of service, knowledge towards COVID-19, and availability of personal protective equipment were independent predictors of good infection prevention practices. Optimizing the infection prevention and control loop of the health facilities is recommended.

scholarly journals Adherence to personal protective equipment use among healthcare workers caring for confirmed COVID-19 and alleged non-COVID-19 patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Meike M. Neuwirth ◽  
Frauke Mattner ◽  
Robin Otchwemah
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Care Workers

AbstractAdherence observations of health care workers (HCW) revealed deficiencies in the use of recommended personal protective equipment (PPE) among HCW caring in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 wards during the first period of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in a university hospital in Germany. The adherence to wearing surgical face or FFP2-masks and disinfecting hands prior to donning and after doffing the PPE was significantly higher in COVID-19 wards However, there was no total adherence of 100% in COVID-19 wards.

Prevalence and causes of unreported needle stick injuries among health care workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Razieh Behzadmehr ◽  
Abbas Balouchi ◽  
Mehran Hesaraki ◽  
Farshid Alazmani Noodeh ◽  
Hosein Rafiemanesh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Random Effect ◽  
Random Effect Model ◽  
Needle Stick ◽  
Care Workers ◽  
Needle Stick Injuries

Abstract Objectives Health care workers (HCWs) are exposed to needle needles daily. Despite individual studies, there is no statistics on the prevalence of unreported needle stick injuries (NSIs) have been reported. This study was performed to determine the prevalence and causes of unreported NSIs among HCWs. Content In present systematic review and meta-analysis study, three international databases (Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed) were searched from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2018. The random model was used to determine the prevalence of unreported needle stick among HCWs. Summary and outlook Forty-one studies performed on 19,635 health care workers entered the final stage. Based-on random effect model, pooled prevalence of unreported needle stick injuries was 59.9% (95% CI: 52.0, 67.7; I2=98.9%). The most common cause of unreported NSIs was: They were not worried about NSIs (n=12). The high prevalence of unreported needle sticks injuries indicates the urgency and necessity of paying attention to strategies to improve reporting among health workers.

scholarly journals Utilization of an Orthopedic Hood as Personal Protective Equipment for Intubation of Coronavirus Patients: a Brief Technical Report

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 215145932093055 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy T. Wills ◽  
Wilhelm A. Zuelzer ◽  
Bryant W. Tran
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Endotracheal Intubation ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Ventilation System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Care Workers ◽  
Technical Report

Background: The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has afflicted millions of people worldwide since its first case was reported in December 2019. Personal protective equipment (PPE) has been tailored accordingly, but as of April 2020, close to 10 000 health care workers in the United States have contracted COVID-19 despite wearing recommended PPE. As such, standard guidelines for PPE may be inadequate for the health care worker performing high-risk aerosolizing procedures such as endotracheal intubation. In this brief technical report, we describe the integration of an orthopedic hood cover as an item for full barrier protection against COVID-19 transmission. Technical Description: The Coronavirus Airway Task Force at Virginia Commonwealth University Medical Center approved this initiative and went live with the full barrier suit during the last week of March 2020. The PPE described in this report includes a Stryker T4 Hood, normally used in conjunction with the Stryker Steri-Shield T4 Helmet. Instead of the helmet, the hood is secured to the head via a baseball cap and binder clip. This head covering apparatus is to be used as an accessory to other PPE items that include an N95 mask, waterproof gown, and disposable gloves. The motor ventilation system is not used in order to prevent airborne viral entry into the hood. Discussion: An advantage of the full barrier suit is an additional layer of droplet protection during intubation. The most notable disadvantage is the absence of a ventilation system within the hood covering. Conclusion: Modification of existing PPE may provide protection for health care workers during high-risk aerosolizing procedures such as endotracheal intubation. Although the integration of this medical equipment meets the immediate needs of an escalating crisis, further innovation is on the horizon. More research is needed to confirm the safety of modified PPE.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document