scholarly journals Skin Barrier Damage due to Prolonged Mask Use among Healthcare Workers and the General Population during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Survey in China

Dermatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Xiao Wan ◽  
Quansheng Lu ◽  
Dandan Sun ◽  
Hong Wu ◽  
Guan Jiang
Keyword(s):  
General Population ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Skin Barrier ◽  
Population History ◽  
Skin Damage ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Effective Response ◽  
Skin Injuries ◽  
Popularization Of Science

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resurged in localized areas in China. Individuals wear masks to prevent the spread of droplets. However, skin barrier damage occurs because of the prolonged use of masks. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> To investigate the prevalence and associated risk factors of skin injuries among healthcare workers (HCWs) and the general population during the COVID-19 outbreak. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A multicenter cross-sectional study of skin barrier damage caused by wearing masks was conducted using an online questionnaire between December 10 and December 31, 2020. Data regarding demographics, characteristics of facial skin damage, and information on masks were registered. Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze factors associated with skin barrier damage, and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to establish correlation strength. <b><i>Results:</i></b> A total of 1,538 responses were retrieved from 1,700 questionnaires (response rate, 90.47%), and 1,409 questionnaires were valid (effective response rate, 91.61%). The respondents comprised 567 HCWs (40.24%) and 842 individuals from the general population (59.76%). The prevalence of skin injuries was 46.03% among HCWs and 46.20% among the general population. History of chronic skin disease (OR, 6.01; 95% CI, 4.75–7.75), type of mask used (OR, 2.77; 95% CI, 1.95–3.93), daily wearing time (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.36–1.82), and mask replacement cycle (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.68–0.86) were associated with skin barrier damage. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> There was a high incidence of skin barrier damage due to prolonged mask use among HCWs and the general population, and treatment and prevention were inadequate. Attention needs to be given to strengthening comprehensive health education and popularization of science.

scholarly journals COVID-19 infections among Healthcare Workers and Transmission within Households

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin L. Schwartz ◽  
Camille Achonu ◽  
Sarah A. Buchan ◽  
Kevin A. Brown ◽  
Brenda Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Population ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Nosocomial Transmission ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Testing Bias

AbstractImportanceProtecting healthcare workers (HCWs) from COVID-19 is a priority to maintain a safe and functioning healthcare system. The risk of transmitting COVID-19 to family members is a source of stress for many.ObjectiveTo describe and compare HCW and non-HCW COVID-19 cases in Ontario, Canada, as well as the frequency of COVID-19 among HCWs’ household members.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsUsing reportable disease data at Public Health Ontario which captures all COVID-19 cases in Ontario, Canada, we conducted a population-based cross-sectional study comparing demographic, exposure, and clinical variables between HCWs and non-HCWs with COVID-19 as of 14 May 2020. We calculated rates of infections over time and determined the frequency of within household transmissions using natural language processing based on residential address.Exposures and OutcomesWe contrasted age, gender, comorbidities, clinical presentation (including asymptomatic and presymptomatic), exposure histories including nosocomial transmission, and clinical outcomes between HCWs and non-HCWs with confirmed COVID-19.ResultsThere were 4,230 (17.5%) HCW COVID-19 cases in Ontario, of whom 20.2% were nurses, 2.3% were physicians, and the remaining 77.4% other specialties. HCWs were more likely to be between 30-60 years of age and female. HCWs were more likely to present asymptomatically (8.1% versus 7.0%, p=0.010) or with atypical symptoms (17.8% versus 10.5%, p<0.001). The mortality among HCWs was 0.2% compared to 10.5% of non-HCWs. HCWs commonly had exposures to a confirmed case or outbreak (74.1%), however only 3.1% were confirmed to be nosocomial. The rate of new infections was 5.5 times higher in HCWs than non-HCWs, but mirrored the epidemic curve. We identified 391 (9.8%) probable secondary household transmissions and 143 (3.6%) acquisitions. Children < 19 years comprised 14.6% of secondary cases compared to only 4.2% of the primary cases.Conclusions and RelevanceHCWs represent a disproportionate number of COVID-19 cases in Ontario but with low confirmed numbers of nosocomial transmission. The data support substantial testing bias and under-ascertainment of general population cases. Protecting HCWs through appropriate personal protective equipment and physical distancing from colleagues is paramount.Key PointsQuestionWhat are the differences between healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers with COVID-19?FindingsIn this population-based cross-sectional study there were 4,230 healthcare workers comprising 17.5% of COVID-19 cases. Healthcare workers were diagnosed with COVID-19 at a rate 5.5 times higher than the general population with 0.8% of all healthcare workers, compared to 0.1% of non-healthcare workers.MeaningHigh healthcare worker COVID-19 burden highlights the importance of physical distancing from colleagues, appropriate personal protective equipment, as well as likely substantial testing bias and under-ascertainment of COVID-19 in the general population.

Edinburgh Vein Study: Methods and Response in a Survey of Venous Disease in the General Population

1997 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 127-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
C J. Evans ◽  
F. G. R. Fowkes ◽  
C. V. Ruckley ◽  
P. L. Allan ◽  
M. N. Carson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Population ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Venous Blood ◽  
Disease Status ◽  
Epidemiological Studies ◽  
Ethnic Origin ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Venous Disease ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Study Participants

Objective: To describe the methods required to conduct a large epidemiological study of venous disease in the general population, and the resulting response. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: University of Edinburgh. Participants: Men and women aged 18–64 years, randomly selected from general practice registers. Methods: Subjects were invited for the following procedures: questionnaire, height and weight measurement, classification of varices and chronic venous insufficiency, duplex measurement of duration of venous reflux and venous blood sampling. A questionnaire survey of non-responders was carried out. Results of response: A total of 1566 subjects attended, a final response rate of 53.8%. The response rate increased with age. The distribution of ethnic origin and social class of attenders was similar to that of the general Edinburgh population. Study participants were generally older, from more affluent areas and more often female than non-responders ( p ≤ 0.001). Conclusions: Large epidemiological studies of venous disease in the community are feasible but the level of response illustrates the importance of obtaining information on the disease status of non-responders.

Attitudes toward disease and prognosis disclosure and decision making for terminally ill patients in Japan, based on a nationwide random sampling survey of the general population and medical practitioners

2006 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 389-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
MITSUNORI MIYASHITA,. ◽  
SHUJI HASHIMOTO ◽  
MASAKO KAWA ◽  
YASUO SHIMA ◽  
HIROMI KAWAGOE ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
General Population ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Medical Practitioners ◽  
Incurable Disease ◽  
Anonymous Questionnaire ◽  
The Family

Objective: Employing a nationwide cross-sectional survey, we investigated the Japanese general population's attitudes toward disease and prognosis disclosure and related factors. Furthermore, we investigated Japanese medical practitioners' attitudes toward disease and prognosis disclosure for patients and decision making.Methods: A nationwide anonymous questionnaire survey was conducted. A total of 5000 individuals were randomly sampled from the general population and 3104 physicians and 6059 nurses were randomly sampled in Japan.Results: Finally, 2422 people from the general population (response rate, 48%), 1577 physicians (51%), and 3361 nurses (56%) returned questionnaires. Among the general population, 73% of participants answered that they “want to know” about their disease and prognosis when in an incurable disease state. Ninety percent desired direct disclosure and 8% disclosure through their family. However, few medical practitioners answered “patient himself” (physician 3%, nurses 4%) as the person whom they would primarily notify about the disease and prognosis when in charge of a patient with an incurable disease. On the other hand, physicians answered “family” most frequently (59%), whereas nurses most commonly responded, “depends on patient's condition” (63%).Significance of research: Several detailed analyses of factors associated with prognosis disclosure were conducted. Japanese physicians need to carefully communicate with the patients individually about whether direct disclosure or disclosure primarily to the family is preferred.

scholarly journals Utilization of Alcohol-Based Hand Sanitizers and Associated Health Risks among Healthcare Workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-sectional Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Desta Assefa ◽  
Tadesse Gudeta
Keyword(s):  
Hand Hygiene ◽  
Health Risks ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Statistical Tests ◽  
Skin Irritation ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Skin Damage ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Hand Sanitizer

Abstract Background Alcohol-based hand sanitizer is a crucial and widely used product to prevent the spreading of corona-virus disease (COVID-19). However, frequent use of alcohol-based hand sanitizer mainly at the point-of-care can cause health risks and shortages in and outside the healthcare facilities. Objective The present study was designed to assess the utilization of alcohol-based hand sanitizers and the incidence of associated health risks among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted at the Jimma Medical Center, Ethiopia, between April 01 and June 27, 2020. The collected data were analyzed and described using descriptive statistical tests with SPSS version 21. Results Ninety-six healthcare workers with 28.69 ± 4.048 years of mean age participated in the study. 95.8% of them used alcohol-based hand sanitizers to prevent COVID-19 virus transmission in the healthcare setting and community. But they encountered challenges to practice hand hygiene with alcohol-based hand sanitizers. The common problems were alcohol-based hand sanitizers unavailability 66(68.8%), costly 50(52.1%), and skin damage 8(8.3%). Most of them experienced health risks such as skin dryness 60(62.5%), skin irritation 27(28.1%), ocular irritation 11(11.5%), cough 11(11.5%), and others. These health risks caused that 9(9.4%) of them do not practice hand hygiene by alcohol-based hand sanitizers (p-value = 0.999). Conclusion To stay safe from COVID-19, healthcare workers faced different challenges, such as access to alcohol-based hand sanitizers and reported health risks. Therefore, the regulatory and public health bodies should promote local production of alcohol-based hand sanitizers with careful follow-up, and its health risks management plan should gain attention.

scholarly journals COVID-19 Vaccination Acceptance among Healthcare Workers and General Population at the Very Beginning of the National Vaccination Program in Poland: A Cross-Sectional, Exploratory Study

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 66
Author(s):  
Karolina Lindner-Pawłowicz ◽  
Agnieszka Mydlikowska-Śmigórska ◽  
Kamila Łampika ◽  
Małgorzata Sobieszczańska
Keyword(s):  
Medical Students ◽  
General Population ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Vaccine Safety ◽  
Vaccination Program ◽  
Considerable Proportion ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Service Staff ◽  
Medical Faculties ◽  
Medical Professions

The aim of the study was to assess the acceptance level of COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare workers (HCW) and the general population in Poland at the start of the national COVID-19 vaccination program from 18–31 December 2020. A cross-sectional anonymous survey was conducted in a group of 1976 people: 1042 health professionals and 934 non-medical professionals using an on-line questionnaire. The most skeptical about the COVID-19 vaccine were students of non-medical faculties, non-medical professions, and administrative–technical health service staff (26.2%, 38.7% and 41.2%, respectively). The most positive attitude to vaccination was reported by doctors, medical students and pharmacists (80.6%, 76.9% and 65.7%, respectively). Doctors (64.7%) and medical students (63.7%) most often declared confidence in vaccines compared to nurses (34.5%). Distrust about vaccine safety was declared by nurses (46.6%) and pharmacists (40.0%). HCW encouraged others to vaccinate more eagerly (65.8%) than non-medical professions (28.3%). Thus, a considerable proportion of HCW in Poland expressed concern about vaccines just prior to the beginning of the COVID-19 immunization program. The significant decrease in the willingness to vaccinate observed in Poland towards the end of 2021 must be considered in the light of the serious COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in the Polish population.

scholarly journals Understanding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Pakistan: The paradigm of Confidence, Convenience and Complacency; A Cross-sectional study.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naveen Siddique Sheikh ◽  
Mumtaz Touseef ◽  
Riddah Sultan ◽  
Kanwal Hassan Cheema ◽  
Sidra Shafiq Cheema ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Population ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Herd Immunity ◽  
Population Data ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Vaccine Uptake ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Vaccination Programs

Background and objectives: Vaccine hesitancy is a big obstacle for vaccination programs, as is anticipated for the COVID-19 vaccination program, resulting in low uptake of vaccines thereby hindering the process of reaching herd immunity. Bearing this in mind the current study was aimed to explore the determinants of vaccine hesitancy amongst the Pakistani population. Methodology: A cross-sectional study was carried out from the 23rd-31st January 2021. The conceptual framework of the study was based on the 3Cs (Confidence, Convenience, Complacency) model. Google-forms-based questionnaire was disseminated amongst the general population. Data collected were entered into SPSS version 26 and analyzed. Results: Of the 421 participants, 68.4% were females. Non-healthcare workers were 55.8% of respondents. Vaccine hesitant individuals, 26.13% reported they were very unlikely to get vaccinated. Vaccine was not safe as it came out too fast was agreed upon by 12.6% individuals, 50.6% were worried about experiencing side-effects, 18% believed vaccine will not offer protection and 5.9% believed vaccine would cause death. Low Practice of SOP in non-Healthcare workers was the strongest contributor to vaccine hesitancy (OR: 5.338, p=0.040, 95% CI: 1.082-26.330) followed by High complacency (p=0.026) and Moderate Complacency (OR: 0.212, p=0.007, 95% CI: 0.069-0.654) towards COVID-19 vaccination. In Healthcare workers the strongest contributor to vaccine hesitancy was having a Moderate Confidence (OR: 0.323, p=0.042, 95% CI: 0.109-0.958) in the vaccine followed by Moderate Convenience (OR: 0.304, p=0.049, 95% CI: 0.093-0.993) for vaccination Conclusion: Campaigning and communication strategies to reaffirm confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine and educating the general population about the vaccine could lead to increased perception of vaccine safety and effectiveness thereby restoring confidence in vaccine and decreasing vaccine hesitancy. Likewise, working to increase vaccine convenience and decreasing complacency towards the COVID-19 vaccine would translate into high vaccine uptake.

Epidemiology of Headache in an English District

Cephalalgia ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
HF Boardman ◽  
E Thomas ◽  
PR Croft ◽  
DS Millson
Keyword(s):  
General Population ◽  
Severe Pain ◽  
Population Survey ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Adult Population ◽  
Population Sample ◽  
Postal Survey ◽  
Severe Headache ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Headache Pain

Headache prevalence, characteristics and impact in adults were measured using a cross-sectional general population survey in North Staffordshire, UK. A postal survey was mailed out to 4885 adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with an adjusted response rate of 56% ( n = 2662). Of respondents 93% reported headache ever and 70% in the last 3 months. Women and younger people reported higher headache prevalences. Of those reporting headache in the last 3 months, 23% experienced headache at least weekly and 16% experienced severe headache pain. Headaches affected work, home or social activities in 43% of sufferers and 20% reported at least moderate headache-related disability. Higher levels of disability were associated with higher levels of pain, 61% with severe disability reporting severe pain compared with 13% who had mild or moderate disability. In the total adult population sample headache affected more than two-thirds in the last 3 months and 14% of all adults reported headache-related disability of at least moderate level, which translates to a large burden in the general population.

A comparison between prospective Internet-based and paper diary recordings of headache among adolescents in the general population

Cephalalgia ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 335-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Berit Krogh ◽  
Bo Larsson ◽  
Øyvind Salvesen ◽  
Mattias Linde
Keyword(s):  
General Population ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Cluster Sampling ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
School Based ◽  
Paper Diary ◽  
Acute Medication ◽  
Headache Diary ◽  
User Acceptability ◽  
Time Assessment

Aim The aim of this article was to develop and apply an Internet-based headache diary (i-diary) for adolescents and compare it with a paper-diary (p-diary) regarding adherence, user acceptability and recorded headache activity. Methods In a cross-sectional school-based study, a representative sample of 488 adolescents aged 12–18 years were randomly allocated by cluster sampling to record for three weeks in i-diaries or p-diaries their headache intensity, disability, and use of acute medication. Results A significantly ( p = 0.008) higher proportion of adolescents in the i-diary group used the diary at least once during the 21-day period (86% vs 76% for the p-diary). However, the p-diary group completed a significantly ( p < 0.001) higher number of diary days (20.8 vs 15.0 days for the i-diary). The response rate for the i-diary-group was largely evenly distributed over the study period; conversely, approximately two-thirds of the adolescents using the p-diary responded on all 21 days, whereas one-fourth did not respond at all. The two diary types were rated as equal in easiness to remember ( p = 0.25), but the i-diaries were more bothersome to use ( p = 0.029). Conclusion Although p-diary users completed a higher proportion of diary days, i-diaries provided more reliable and credible estimates of headache parameters because of better real-time assessment.

scholarly journals Association Between Voice Handicap Index and Reflux Symptom Index: A cross-sectional study of undiagnosed general and teacher cohorts in Saudi Arabia

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rawan Alanazi ◽  
Ahmed Alrahim ◽  
Sara Bayounos ◽  
Abdulrahman Al-Ghuwainem ◽  
Mohammad H. Al-Bar
Keyword(s):  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
General Population ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Laryngopharyngeal Reflux ◽  
Voice Disorders ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Reflux Symptom Index ◽  
Symptom Index ◽  
Cross Sectional

Objectives: This study aimed to assess potential associations between self-reported symptoms of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and voice disorders among two undiagnosed cohorts in Saudi Arabia. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted from February to April 2017 in Khobar, Saudi Arabia. Validated Arabic versions of the Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) and 10-item Voice Handicap Index (VHI-10) were distributed to 400 teachers at 13 schools and 300 members of the general population attending an ear, nose and throat clinic in Khobar. Scores of >13 and >11 on the RSI and VHI-10 indicated a potential subjective diagnosis of LPR and voice disorders, respectively. Results: A total of 446 individuals took part in the study, including 260 members of the general population (response rate: 86.7%) and 186 teachers (response rate: 46.5%). The mean age was 32.5 years. In total, 62.2% complained of voice and/or reflux problems, with the remaining 37.8% not reporting/unaware of any problems in this regard. Among the teachers, 30.6% and 18.3% had positive RSI and VHI-10 scores, respectively, while 43.1% and 14.6% of the individuals from the general population had positive RSI and VHI-10 scores, respectively. Overall, VHI-10 scores were significantly associated with RSI scores (P <0.001). Conclusion: A significant association between RSI and VHI-10 scores suggests that there may be an association between LPR and voice disorders. These tools would therefore be a valuable method of monitoring patients; however, they cannot be used to confirm a diagnosis. Thus, more detailed studies are needed to confirm this association using a larger sample size.Keywords: Voice Disorders; Laryngopharyngeal Reflux; Hoarseness; Diagnostic Self Evaluation; School Teachers; Saudi Arabia.

scholarly journals Towards a new epidemiological definition of chronic rhinitis: prevalence of nasal complaints in the general population

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
K.S. Avdeeva ◽  
W.J. Fokkens ◽  
S. Reitsma
Keyword(s):  
General Population ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Future Studies ◽  
Chronic Rhinitis ◽  
Current Definition ◽  
Nasal Symptoms ◽  
Non Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Definition Of

Background: Chronic rhinitis (CR) is currently defined as the presence of at least two nasal symptoms for at least 1 hour per day for more than 12 weeks per year. Such definition lacks evidence-based foundation. CR patients are often divided into ‘runners’ and ‘blockers’, although the evidence supporting such subdivision is limited. The aim of the study was to define CR, to estimate its prevalence and the proportion of ‘runners’ and ‘blockers’. Methods: Cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study in a random sample of participants representing the general population of the Netherlands. Results: The questionnaire was sent to 5000 residents of the Netherlands; the response rate was 27%. CR was defined as at least 1 nasal complaint present for more than 3 weeks per year. The prevalence of CR in the general population was 40%. Participants who would have been excluded by the former CR definition were shown to have a significantly higher VAS compared to the controls. The larger part of CR group was represented by non-allergic rhinitis (NAR): 70% vs 30%. There were 25% ‘Blockers’ and 22% ‘Runners’ in the CR group, whereas more than a half of the CR group could be classified in neither of these subgroups. Conclusion: Based on our data, we suggest that the current definition of CR should be revised and propose a new definition: at least one nasal complaint present for at least 3 weeks per year; although future studies are needed to further validate the proposed definition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document