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

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katarina Hoernke ◽  
Nehla Djellouli ◽  
Lily Jay Andrews ◽  
Sasha Lewis-Jackson ◽  
Louisa Manby ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Secondary Care ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
National Level ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Patients At Risk ◽  
Multiple Challenges ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Frontline Healthcare Workers

Objectives To 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. Methods A rapid qualitative appraisal study combining three sources of data: semi-structured 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). HCWs interviewed were from secondary care, primary care and specialist community clinics. Media and policy data were from across the UK. Results A 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 re-use 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 inequitable access to PPE for community, lower seniority, female and ethnic minority HCWs. Participants continued delivering care despite the physical discomfort, practical problems and communication barriers associated with PPE use. Conclusion This 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 Stress and Associated Factors among Frontline Healthcare Workers in the COVID-19 Epicenter of Da Nang City, Vietnam

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (14) ◽  
pp. 7378
Author(s):  
Nhan Phuc Thanh Nguyen ◽  
Duong Dinh Le ◽  
Robert Colebunders ◽  
Joseph Nelson Siewe Fodjo ◽  
Trung Dinh Tran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Stress Component ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Working Hours ◽  
Health Facilities ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Laboratory Workers ◽  
Frontline Healthcare Workers ◽  
Second Wave

Frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) involved in the COVID-19 response have a higher risk of experiencing psychosocial distress amidst the pandemic. Between July and September 2020, a second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic appeared in Vietnam with Da Nang city being the epicenter. During the outbreak, HCWs were quarantined within the health facilities in a bid to limit the spread of COVID-19 to their respective communities. Using the stress component of the 21-item Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21), we assessed the level of stress among HCWs in Da Nang city. Between 30 August and 15 September 2020, 746 frontline HCWs were recruited to fill in an online structured questionnaire. Overall, 44.6% of participants experienced increased stress and 18.9% severe or extremely severe stress. In multivariable analysis, increased stress was associated with longer working hours (OR = 1.012; 95% CI: 1.004–1.019), working in health facilities providing COVID-19 treatment (OR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.04–2.39), having direct contact with patients or their bio-samples (physicians, nurses and laboratory workers; OR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.02–1.99), low confidence in the available personal protective equipment (OR = 0.846; 95% CI: 0.744–0.962) and low knowledge on COVID-19 prevention and treatment (OR = 0.853; 95% CI: 0.739–0.986). In conclusion, many frontline HCWs experienced increased stress during the COVID-19 outbreak in Da Nang city. Reducing working time, providing essential personal protective equipment and enhancing the knowledge on COVID-19 will help to reduce this stress. Moreover, extra support is needed for HCWs who are directly exposed to COVID-19 patients.

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 Knowledge, Attitude and Practice of Personal Safety Measures Adopted by Medical Practioners during the Covid-19 Pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 883-887
Author(s):  
Hemapriya L ◽  
Maureen Prativa Tigga ◽  
Anil Kumar M.R ◽  
Prathap T ◽  
Neha Wali ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Urban Areas ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Well Being ◽  
World Health ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Personal Safety ◽  
Safety Measures

BACKGROUND A novel coronavirus (now termed as SARS-CoV-2) was detected as the causative agent of severe pneumonia in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, in December 2019. Declared by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a global pandemic in March 2020, it has created profound changes in global economy and healthcare systems. This study evaluates the knowledge and practice with regard to various personal safety measures used by the healthcare professionals. METHODS We conducted a questionnaire study after obtaining approval, from the Institutional ethical committee. An online survey was conducted using a preformatted questionnaire consisting of multiple-choice questions which assessed the knowledge and practices adopted by various healthcare professionals. The survey was done between 1st and 30th of June 2020 and a total of 536 responses was analysed. RESULTS 58.4 % of the participants were females, 66 % of the healthcare workers worked at a private hospital / private medical college with 82.1 % being located in urban areas. Of the 536 respondents, 90.1 % practiced bathing immediately after returning home and 86.8 % sanitized their accessories. 86.9 % of the professionals used frequent sanitization with use of mask and gloves whereas only 12.3 % used full personal protective equipment. 58 % of females had used hydroxychloroquine as prophylaxis whereas only 41 % of males used it (statistically significant, P = 0.005). Healthcare workers in younger age group (23 - 40 years) were more likely to maintain distance with family members, and government doctors were significantly more likely to do so (P < 0.001) as compared to private practitioners. CONCLUSIONS With the medical professionals being at high risk for contracting the infection, the need to provide the healthcare professionals with adequate personal protective equipment is of utmost importance. There is also a need to maintain the well-being of the healthcare professionals as they are the weakest link in the chain. KEY WORDS Medical Practitioners, Personal Protective Equipment, Safety Measures

scholarly journals Impact of enhanced personal protective equipment on the physical and mental well-being of healthcare workers during COVID-19

2020 ◽  
pp. postgradmedj-2020-139150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramanathan Swaminathan ◽  
Bimantha Perera Mukundadura ◽  
Shashi Prasad
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Mental Well Being

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated the use of enhanced personal protective equipment (PPE) in healthcare workers in patient-facing roles. We describe the impact on the physical and mental well-being of healthcare professionals who use enhanced PPE consistently.MethodsWe conducted a single-centre, cross-sectional study among healthcare professionals who use enhanced PPE. A web-based questionnaire was disseminated to evaluate the effects on individuals’ physical and mental well-being. Physical and mental impact was assessed through a visual analogue scale.ResultsProspective analysis of the views of 72 respondents is reported. 63.9% were women and 36.1% were men. Physical impact included exhaustion, headache, skin changes, breathlessness and a negative impact on vision. Communication difficulties, somnolence, negative impact on overall performance and difficulties in using surgical instrumentation were reported.ConclusionOur study demonstrates the undeniable negative impact on the front-line healthcare workers using enhanced PPE and lays the ground for larger multicentric assessments given for it to potentially be the norm for the foreseeable future.

scholarly journals Access to personal protective equipment in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom: results from a nationwide cohort study (UK-REACH)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher A Martin ◽  
Daniel Pan ◽  
Joshua Nazareth ◽  
Avinash Aujayeb ◽  
Luke Bryant ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Questionnaire Response ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Uk

Abstract Objectives: To determine the prevalence and predictors of self-reported access to appropriate personal protective equipment (aPPE) for healthcare workers (HCWs) in the United Kingdom (UK) during the first UK national COVID-19 lockdown (March 2020) and at the time of questionnaire response (December 2020 - February 2021). Design: Two cross sectional analyses using data from a questionnaire-based cohort study. Setting: Nationwide questionnaire from 4th December 2020 to 28th February 2021. Participants: A representative sample of HCWs or ancillary workers in a UK healthcare setting aged 16 or over, registered with one of seven main UK healthcare regulatory bodies. Main outcome measure: Binary measure of self-reported aPPE (access all of the time vs access most of the time or less frequently) at two timepoints: the first national lockdown in the UK (primary analysis) and at the time of questionnaire response (secondary analysis). Results: 10,508 HCWs were included in the primary analysis, and 12,252 in the secondary analysis. 3702 (35.2%) of HCWs reported aPPE at all times in the primary analysis; 6806 (83.9%) reported aPPE at all times in the secondary analysis. After adjustment (for age, sex, ethnicity, migration status, occupation, aerosol generating procedure exposure, work sector, work region, working hours, night shift frequency and trust in employing organisation), older HCWs (per decade increase in age: aOR 1.2, 95% CI 1.16 - 1.26, p<0.001) and those working in Intensive Care Units (1.61, 1.38 - 1.89, p<0.001) were more likely to report aPPE at all times. Those from Asian ethnic groups compared to White (0.77, 0.67 - 0.89, p<0.001), those in allied health professional (AHPs) and dental roles (vs those in medical roles; AHPs: 0.77, 0.68 - 0.87, p<0.001; dental: 0.63, 0.49 - 0.81, p<0.001), and those who saw a higher number of COVID-19 patients compared to those who saw none (≥21 patients 0.74, 0.61 - 0.90, p=0.003) were less likely to report aPPE at all times in the primary analysis. aPPE at all times was also not uniform across UK regions (reported access being better in South West and North East England than London). Those who trusted their employing organisation to deal with concerns about unsafe clinical practice, compared to those who did not, were twice as likely to report aPPE at all times (2.18, 1.97 - 2.40, p<0.001). With the exception of occupation, these factors were also significantly associated with aPPE at all times in the secondary analysis. Conclusions: We found that only a third of HCWs in the UK reported aPPE at all times during the period of the first lockdown and that aPPE had improved later in the pandemic. We also identified key sociodemographic and occupational determinants of aPPE during the first UK lockdown, the majority of which have persisted since lockdown was eased. These findings have important public health implications for HCWs, particularly as cases of infection and long-COVID continue to rise in the UK.

scholarly journals Knowledge, Attitude and Practice of Personal Safety Measures Adopted by Medical Practioners During the COVID 19 Pandemic

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hemapriya.L Kukreja ◽  
Maureen Prativa Tigga ◽  
Neha Wali ◽  
Prathap.T ◽  
Anil Kumar M R ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Personal Safety ◽  
Safety Measures ◽  
Attitude And Practice ◽  
Knowledge Attitude And Practice

Abstract Introduction: A novel coronavirus (now termed as SARS-CoV 2) was detected as causative agent of severe pneumonia in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China in December 2019. Declared by the WHO as a global pandemic in March 2020, it has created profound changes in global economy and healthcare systems. COVID-19 is transmitted through close contact and droplets with healthcare professionals at significant risk of acquiring the infection, thus requiring to protect themselves. Various measures help in protecting the professionals from contracting the infection. These include hand hygiene, N95 masks, goggles, gloves, gowns, face shields, coveralls and frequent sanitization. Healthcare professionals need to be educated in these various modalities with proper protocols and policies enacted by the health institutions. This study evaluates the knowledge, attitude and practice of various personal safety measures used by the healthcare professionals.Materials and Methods: After institution ethical committee approval, we conducted an online survey with a preformatted questionnaire consisting of multiple choice questions which assessed the knowledge, attitude and practices adopted by the various healthcare professionals. The survey was done between 1st - 30th of June 2020 and a total of 536 responses were analyzed. Results: 58.4% of the participants were females, 66% of the healthcare workers worked at a private hospital/ private medical college with 82.1% being located in urban areas. Of the 536 respondents, 90.1% practiced bathing immediately after returning home and 86.8% sanitized their accessories. 86.9% of the professionals used frequent sanitization with use of mask and gloves whereas only 12.3% used full personal protective equipment. 58% of females had used Hydroxychloroquine as prophylaxis whereas only 41% of males used it ( statistically significant, p = 0.005 ). Healthcare workers in younger age group ( 23-40 years ) were more likely to maintain distance with family members and government doctors were significantly more likely to do so ( p< 0.001 ) as compared to private practitioners. Conclusion: With the medical professionals being at high risk for contracting the infection, the need to provide the healthcare professionals with adequate personal protective equipment is of utmost importance. There is also a need to maintain the well-being of the healthcare professionals as they are the weakest link in the chain.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document