scholarly journals A pilot study to assess use of fluorescent lotion in patient care simulations to illustrate pathogen dissemination and train personnel in correct use of personal protective equipment

Author(s):  
Heba Alhmidi ◽  
Sreelatha Koganti ◽  
Myreen E. Tomas ◽  
Jennifer L. Cadnum ◽  
Annette Jencson ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
pp. bmjinnov-2020-000557
Author(s):  
Sharon Rikin ◽  
Eric J Epstein ◽  
Inessa Gendlina

IntroductionAt the early epicentre of the COVID-19 crisis in the USA, our institution saw a surge in the demand for inpatient consultations for areas impacted by COVID-19 (eg, infectious diseases, nephrology, palliative care) and shortages in personal protective equipment (PPE). We aimed to provide timely specialist input for consult requests during the COVID-19 pandemic by implementing an Inpatient eConsult Programme.MethodsWe used the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation and maintenance implementation science framework and run chart analysis to evaluate the reach, adoption and maintenance of the Inpatient eConsult Programme compared with traditional in-person consults. We solicited qualitative feedback from frontline physicians and specialists for programme improvements.ResultsDuring the study period, there were 46 available in-person consult orders and 21 new eConsult orders. At the peak of utilisation, 42% of all consult requests were eConsults, and by the end of the study period, utilisation fell to 20%. Qualitative feedback revealed subspecialties best suited for eConsults (infectious diseases, nephrology, haematology, endocrinology) and influenced improvements to the ordering workflow, documentation, billing and education regarding use.DiscussionWhen offered inpatient eConsult requests as an alternative to in-person consults in the context of a surge in patients with COVID-19, frontline physicians used eConsult requests and decreased use of in-person consults. As the demand for consults decreased and PPE shortages were no longer a major concern, eConsult utilisation decreased, revealing a preference for in-person consultations when possible.ConclusionsLessons learnt can be used to develop and implement inpatient eConsults to meet context-specific challenges at other institutions.


Author(s):  
Roberto Barcala-Furelos ◽  
Cristian Abelairas-Gómez ◽  
Alejandra Alonso-Calvete ◽  
Francisco Cano-Noguera ◽  
Aida Carballo-Fazanes ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: On-boat resuscitation can be applied by lifeguards in an inflatable rescue boat (IRB). Due to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-COV-2) and recommendations for the use of personal protective equipment (PPE), prehospital care procedures need to be re-evaluated. The objective of this study was to determine how the use of PPE influences the amount of preparation time needed before beginning actual resuscitation and the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR; QCPR) on an IRB. Methods: Three CPR tests were performed by 14 lifeguards, in teams of two, wearing different PPE: (1) Basic PPE (B-PPE): gloves, a mask, and protective glasses; (2) Full PPE (F-PPE): B-PPE + a waterproof apron; and (3) Basic PPE + plastic blanket (B+PPE). On-boat resuscitation using a bag-valve-mask (BVM) and high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter was performed sailing at 20km/hour. Results: Using B-PPE takes less time and is significantly faster than F-PPE (B-PPE 17 [SD = 2] seconds versus F-PPE 69 [SD = 17] seconds; P = .001), and the use of B+PPE is slightly higher (B-PPE 17 [SD = 2] seconds versus B+PPE 34 [SD = 6] seconds; P = .002). The QCPR remained similar in all three scenarios (P >.05), reaching values over 79%. Conclusion: The use of PPE during on-board resuscitation is feasible and does not interfere with quality when performed by trained lifeguards. The use of a plastic blanket could be a quick and easy alternative to offer extra protection to lifeguards during CPR on an IRB.


2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. S231-S240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Therkorn ◽  
David Drewry ◽  
Jennifer Andonian ◽  
Lauren Benishek ◽  
Carrie Billman ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Fluorescent tracers are often used with ultraviolet lights to visibly identify healthcare worker self-contamination after doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE). This method has drawbacks, as it cannot detect pathogen-sized contaminants nor airborne contamination in subjects’ breathing zones. Methods A contamination detection/quantification method was developed using 2-µm polystyrene latex spheres (PSLs) to investigate skin contamination (via swabbing) and potential inhalational exposure (via breathing zone air sampler). Porcine skin coupons were used to estimate the PSL swabbing recovery efficiency and limit of detection (LOD). A pilot study with 5 participants compared skin contamination levels detected via the PSL vs fluorescent tracer methods, while the air sampler quantified potential inhalational exposure to PSLs during doffing. Results Average PSL skin swab recovery efficiency was 40% ± 29% (LOD = 1 PSL/4 cm2 of skin). In the pilot study, all subjects had PSL and fluorescent tracer skin contamination. Two subjects had simultaneously located contamination of both types on a wrist and hand. However, for all other subjects, the PSL method enabled detection of skin contamination that was not detectable by the fluorescent tracer method. Hands/wrists were more commonly contaminated than areas of the head/face (57% vs 23% of swabs with PSL detection, respectively). One subject had PSLs detected by the breathing zone air sampler. Conclusions This study provides a well-characterized method that can be used to quantitate levels of skin and inhalational contact with simulant pathogen particles. The PSL method serves as a complement to the fluorescent tracer method to study PPE doffing self-contamination.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Villa ◽  
Marlene Grenon

Abstract ObjectivesTo reduce the spread of the infection, especially during aerosol generating procedures, we invented “The Cupola”, a shield that creates a mechanical barrier around the patient’s head and body. With this pilot study we aimed to assess the effectiveness of an additional layer of protection (The Cupola) developed for providers working in the oropharyngeal region.ResultsThe mean number of 0.3 μm particles with no Cupola was 3777 (SD: ±556), with The Cupola was 2068 (SD: ±1468) and with the Cupola and Drape was 2031 (SD: ±1108) (p<0.015). The mean number of 0.5 μm airborne particles with no Cupola was 65 (SD: ±7), with The Cupola was 29 (SD: ±28) and with the Cupola and Drape was 28 (SD: ±23) (p<0.05). Results showed a significant reduction of aerosols generated during simulated dental procedures when the Cupola was used. The Cupola offers an extra layer of protection in addition to the recommended personal protective equipment.


2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-33
Author(s):  
Boris Tufegdzic ◽  
Massimo Lamperti ◽  
Kyne Woodsford

To protect clinicians without access to recommended personal protective equipment during aerosol-generating procedures such as endotracheal intubation, various products have been introduced to clinical practice. The authors would like to present a pilot study with a novel intubating box, the LIFE PLUS MINI CAPSULE S®, which has improved systems to prevent the egress of particles from the box as well as a built-in HEPA (High Efficiency Particulate Air) aspiration filter. Nineteen anesthesiologists simulated endotracheal intubation on a mannequin in test conditions with and without using the LIFE PLUS MINI CAPSULE S®. All anesthesiologists successfully intubated the mannequin at first attempt, and there were no failed intubations. The median (range) intubation time was 9.1 (2.0–25.0) seconds longer when the LIFE PLUS MINI CAPSULE S® was used, and there were no breaches of personal protective equipment. The leakage of airborne particles was analyzed using a Qualitative and a Quantitative Fit Test. Although our pilot study shows promising results, further research is required to validate our results in vivo and in a larger sample size which will provide us with a better insight into the efficacy and applicability of this safety tool in emergency and elective clinical conditions.


2021 ◽  
Vol 111 (9) ◽  
pp. 1595-1599
Author(s):  
Martin Krause ◽  
Andrew Henderson ◽  
Daniel Griner ◽  
Olivia S. Rissland ◽  
Jeremy Beard ◽  
...  

During the COVID-19 pandemic, a shortage of personal protective equipment compromised efficient patient care and provider safety. Volunteers from many different backgrounds worked to meet these demands. Additive manufacturing, laser cutting, and alternative supply chains were used to produce, test, and deliver essential equipment for health care workers and first responders. Distributed equipment included ear guards, face shields, and masks. Contingent designs were created for powered air-purifying respirator hoods, filtered air pumps, intubation shields, and N95 masks.


Author(s):  
Amanda Danielle Wollitz ◽  
Christine Hong ◽  
Fernando Blanco

Abstract Purpose To describe our pharmacy department’s plan for conservation of personal protective equipment (PPE) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic to ensure continued availability of sterile compounded products. Summary PPE shortages impacted hospitals throughout the nation in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic response. The PPE requirement for sterile compounding and need to maintain supplies within the pharmacy cleanroom is often overlooked. A sustained supply of PPE is critical to ensure an uninterrupted supply of compounded medications to our patient population. Multiple conservation strategies, including staffing changes, communication, adjustments to training, and even reuse of select PPE, can assist with conservation. Conclusion PPE in pharmacy cleanrooms is critical for the continued provision of sterile compounds with appropriate beyond-use dates and effective patient care. Pharmacy departments must employ multiple conservation strategies to ensure PPE is available for continued compounding of sterile products, and early planning and implementation of conservation strategies are key.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Villa ◽  
Marlene Grenon

Abstract Objectives To reduce the spread of the infection, especially during aerosol generating procedures, we invented “The Cupola”, a shield that creates a mechanical barrier around the patient’s head and body. With this pilot study we aimed to assess the effectiveness of an additional layer of protection (The Cupola) developed for providers working in the oropharyngeal region. Results The mean number of 0.3 μm particles with no Cupola was 3777 (SD: ± 556), with The Cupola was 2068 (SD: ± 1468) and with the Cupola and Drape was 2031 (SD: ± 1108) (p < 0.015). The mean number of 0.5 μm airborne particles with no Cupola was 65 (SD: ± 7), with The Cupola was 29 (SD: ± 28) and with the Cupola and Drape was 28 (SD: ± 23) (p < 0.05). Results showed a significant reduction of aerosols generated during simulated dental procedures when the Cupola was used. The Cupola offers an extra layer of protection in addition to the recommended personal protective equipment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document