scholarly journals Examining the cost-effectiveness of personal protective equipment for formal healthcare workers in Kenya during the COVID-19 pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob Kazungu ◽  
Kenneth Munge ◽  
Kalin Werner ◽  
Nicholas Risko ◽  
Andres I. Vecino-Ortiz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Healthcare Worker ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Return On Investment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Health Economic Evaluation ◽  
Response Strategy ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
Protective Equipment

Abstract Background Healthcare workers are at a higher risk of COVID-19 infection during care encounters compared to the general population. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) have been shown to protect COVID-19 among healthcare workers, however, Kenya has faced PPE shortages that can adequately protect all healthcare workers. We, therefore, examined the health and economic consequences of investing in PPE for healthcare workers in Kenya. Methods We conducted a cost-effectiveness and return on investment (ROI) analysis using a decision-analytic model following the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) guidelines. We examined two outcomes: 1) the incremental cost per healthcare worker death averted, and 2) the incremental cost per healthcare worker COVID-19 case averted. We performed a multivariate sensitivity analysis using 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations. Results Kenya would need to invest $3.12 million (95% CI: 2.65–3.59) to adequately protect healthcare workers against COVID-19. This investment would avert 416 (IQR: 330–517) and 30,041 (IQR: 7243 – 102,480) healthcare worker deaths and COVID-19 cases respectively. Additionally, such an investment would result in a healthcare system ROI of $170.64 million (IQR: 138–209) – equivalent to an 11.04 times return. Conclusion Despite other nationwide COVID-19 prevention measures such as social distancing, over 70% of healthcare workers will still be infected if the availability of PPE remains scarce. As part of the COVID-19 response strategy, the government should consider adequate investment in PPE for all healthcare workers in the country as it provides a large return on investment and it is value for money.

scholarly journals Examining the Cost-effectiveness of Personal Protective Equipment for Formal Healthcare Workers in Kenya during the COVID-19 Pandemic

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob Kazungu ◽  
Kenneth Munge ◽  
Kalin Werner ◽  
Nicholas Risko ◽  
Andres Vecino Ortiz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Healthcare Worker ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Return On Investment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Health Economic Evaluation ◽  
Response Strategy ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background: Healthcare workers are at a higher risk of COVID-19 infection during care encounters compared to the general population. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) have been shown to protect COVID-19 among healthcare workers, however, Kenya has faced PPE shortages that can adequately protect all healthcare workers. We, therefore, examined the health and economic consequences of investing in PPE for healthcare workers in Kenya. Methods: We conducted a cost-effectiveness and return on investment (ROI) analysis using a decision-analytic model following the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) guidelines. We examined two outcomes: 1) the cost per healthcare worker death averted, and 2) the cost per healthcare worker COVID-19 case averted. We performed a multivariate sensitivity analysis using 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations. Results: Kenya would need to invest $3.12 million to adequately protect healthcare workers against COVID-19. This investment would avert 416 and 30,041 healthcare worker deaths and COVID-19 cases respectively. Additionally, such an investment would result in a societal ROI of $170.64 million – equivalent to an 11.04 times return. Conclusion: Despite other nationwide COVID-19 prevention measures such as social distancing, over 70% of healthcare workers will still be infected if the availability of PPE remains scarce. As part of the COVID-19 response strategy, the government should consider adequate investment in PPE for all healthcare workers in the country as it provides a large return on investment and it is value for money.

scholarly journals Determining the source of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a healthcare worker

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nasia Safdar ◽  
Gage K. Moreno ◽  
Katarina M. Braun ◽  
Thomas C. Friedrich ◽  
David H. O’Connor
Keyword(s):  
Infection Control ◽  
Healthcare Worker ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Total Population ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Hospital Infection Control ◽  
Risk Of Exposure ◽  
N95 Respirators ◽  
Cumulative Prevalence

BackgroundHealthcare workers (HCWs) are at the frontlines of the COVID-19 pandemic and are at risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 infection from their interactions with patients and in the community (1, 2). Limited availability of recommended personal protective equipment (PPE), in particular N95 respirators, has fueled concerns about whether HCWs are adequately protected from exposure while caring for patients. Understanding the source of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a HCW – the community or the healthcare system – is critical for understanding the effectiveness of hospital infection control and PPE practices. In Dane County, Wisconsin, community prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 is relatively low (cumulative prevalence of ~0.06% – positive cases / total population in Dane county as of April 17). Although SARS-CoV-2 infections in HCWs are often presumed to be acquired during the course of patient care, there are few reports unambiguously identifying the source of acquisition.ObjectiveTo determine the source of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in a healthcare worker.

scholarly journals Quantification of occupational and community risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among healthcare workers in a large U.S. healthcare system

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia M. Baker ◽  
Kristin N. Nelson ◽  
Elizabeth Overton ◽  
Benjamin A. Lopman ◽  
Timothy L. Lash ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Healthcare Worker ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Occupational Risk Factors ◽  
Community Risk ◽  
Community Risk Factors ◽  
Zip Code ◽  
Pcr Test

AbstractBackgroundQuantifying occupational risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers can inform efforts to improve healthcare worker and patient safety and reduce transmission. This study aimed to quantify demographic, occupational, and community risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among healthcare workers in a large metropolitan healthcare system.MethodsWe analyzed data from a cross-sectional survey conducted from April through June of 2020 linking risk factors for occupational and community exposure to COVID-19 with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. A multivariable logistic regression model was fit to quantify risk factors for infection. Participants were employees and medical staff members who elected to participate in SARS-CoV-2 serology testing offered to all healthcare workers as part of a quality initiative, and who completed a survey on exposure to COVID-19 and use of personal protective equipment. Exposures of interest included known demographic risk factors for COVID-19, residential zip code incidence of COVID-19, occupational exposure to PCR test-positive healthcare workers or patients, and use of personal protective equipment. The primary outcome of interest was SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity.ResultsSARS-CoV-2 seropositivity was estimated to be 5.7% (95% CI: 5.2%-6.1%) among 10,275 healthcare workers. Community contact with a person known or suspected to have COVID-19 (aOR=1.9, 95% CI:1.4-2.5) and zip code level COVID-19 incidence (aOR: 1.4, 95% CI: 1.0-2.0) increased the odds of infection. Black individuals were at high risk (aOR=2.0, 95% CI:1.6-2.4). Overall, occupational risk factors accounted for 27% (95% CI: 25%-30%) of the risk among healthcare workers and included contact with a PCR test-positive healthcare worker (aOR=1.2, 95% CI:1.0-1.6).ConclusionsCommunity risk factors, including contact with a COVID-19 positive individual and residential COVID-19 incidence, are more strongly associated with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among healthcare workers than exposure in the workplace.

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 Fit Testing Retrofitted Full-Face Snorkel Masks as a Form of Novel Personal Protective Equipment During the COVID-19 Pandemic

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Stephanie Toigo ◽  
Michel Jacques ◽  
Tarek Razek ◽  
Ewa Rajda ◽  
Sidney Omelon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Health Centre ◽  
Disease Outbreaks ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Passing Rate ◽  
Fit Testing ◽  
Full Face ◽  
Medical Grade

ABSTRACT Objective: Bottlenecks in the personal protective equipment (PPE) supply chain have contributed to shortages of PPE during the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in fractures in the functionality of healthcare systems. This study was conducted with the aim of determining the effectiveness of retrofitted commercial snorkel masks as an alternative respirator for healthcare workers during infectious disease outbreaks. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed, analyzing qualitative and quantitative fit test results of the retrofitted Aria Ocean Reef® full-face snorkeling mask on healthcare workers at the McGill University Health Centre between April-June 2020. Historical fit test results, using medical-grade respirators, for healthcare workers were also analyzed. Results: During the study period, 71 participants volunteered for fit testing, 60.6% of which were nurses. The overall fit test passing rate using the snorkel mask was 83.1%. Of the participants who did not previously pass fit testing with medical-grade respirators, 80% achieved a passing fit test with the snorkel respirator. Conclusions: The results suggest that this novel respirator may be an effective and feasible alternative solution to address PPE shortages, while still providing healthcare workers with ample protection. Additional robust testing will be required to ensure that respirator fit is maintained, after numerous rounds of disinfection.

scholarly journals Acoustic voice characteristics with and without wearing a facemask

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Duy Duong Nguyen ◽  
Patricia McCabe ◽  
Donna Thomas ◽  
Alison Purcell ◽  
Maree Doble ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Mask Condition ◽  
Connected Speech ◽  
Significant Attenuation ◽  
Cepstral Peak Prominence ◽  
Vocal Intensity ◽  
Significant Change ◽  
The Voice

AbstractFacemasks are essential for healthcare workers but characteristics of the voice whilst wearing this personal protective equipment are not well understood. In the present study, we compared acoustic voice measures in recordings of sixteen adults producing standardised vocal tasks with and without wearing either a surgical mask or a KN95 mask. Data were analysed for mean spectral levels at 0–1 kHz and 1–8 kHz regions, an energy ratio between 0–1 and 1–8 kHz (LH1000), harmonics-to-noise ratio (HNR), smoothed cepstral peak prominence (CPPS), and vocal intensity. In connected speech there was significant attenuation of mean spectral level at 1–8 kHz region and there was no significant change in this measure at 0–1 kHz. Mean spectral levels of vowel did not change significantly in mask-wearing conditions. LH1000 for connected speech significantly increased whilst wearing either a surgical mask or KN95 mask but no significant change in this measure was found for vowel. HNR was higher in the mask-wearing conditions than the no-mask condition. CPPS and vocal intensity did not change in mask-wearing conditions. These findings implied an attenuation effects of wearing these types of masks on the voice spectra with surgical mask showing less impact than the KN95.

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.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document