scholarly journals A Survey of County Health Departments of Kansas Regarding COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-126
Author(s):  
Talkad Raghuveer ◽  
Rosey Zackula ◽  
Robert Wittler
Keyword(s):  
Public Education ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Descriptive Statistics ◽  
Contact Tracing ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Health Departments ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
Phone Calls ◽  
The Us ◽  
Collection Period

Introduction. SARS-CoV-2 virus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) causing COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 2019) initially was identified in China in December 2019. It has resulted in a pandemic with increasing spread of the virus in the US. The county health departments around US are spearheading the response to contain the spread of this virus. Methods. This project was a survey of county health departments in the state of Kansas with data collection period from 4/15 to 4/24/2020. This study evaluated the staffing, resources, and funding of these health departments and how it was affecting the efforts to contain COVID-19. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the responses. Results. A total of 75% of the county health departments in Kansas responded to the survey. In 89% of locations, the staffing had not increased. Most health departments had an average of five people and the four largest ones had 30 to 98 staff working on COVID-19. Most locations used the Kansas Department of Health and Environment criteria for testing and used a combination of state or private laboratories. The results of the tests were available three days or longer in 62% and after five days in 14% of sites. All locations were active in contact tracing, but most had 1-3 people for this purpose and in 90% the contact tracing interview was via phone calls. There was no change in funding in 21% and decreased funding in 8.5% of health departments. Most locations had an average of five nasopharyngeal swabs on the day of the survey. The most common needs expressed were help to increase testing capability, more public education, more personal protective equipment, increased personnel, and assistance with contract tracing. Conclusions. There is an urgent need in Kansas to increase support to county health departments for testing capability, personal protective equipment, increased number of staff, increased help with contact tracing, and especially increase support for public education.

scholarly journals Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Surveillance and Exposure in the Perioperative Setting With Universal Testing and Personal Protective Equipment Policies

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anoshe Aslam ◽  
Jessica Singh ◽  
Elizabeth Robilotti ◽  
Karin Chow ◽  
Tarun Bist ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Contact Tracing ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Diagnostic Strategies ◽  
Asymptomatic Patients ◽  
Polymerase Chain

Abstract Background New York City (NYC) experienced a surge of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases in March and April 2020. Since then, universal polymerase chain reaction (PCR)–based surveillance testing and personal protective equipment (PPE) measures are in wide use in procedural settings. There is limited published experience on the utility and sustainability of PCR-based surveillance testing in areas with receding and consistently low community COVID-19 rates. Methods The study was conducted at a tertiary care cancer center in NYC from 22 March to 22 August 2020. Asymptomatic patients underwent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing before surgeries, interventional radiology procedures, and endoscopy. Contact tracing in procedural areas was done if a patient with an initial negative screen retested positive within 48 hours of the procedure. Results From March 22 until August 22, 2020, 11 540 unique patients underwent 14 233 tests before surgeries or procedures at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Overall, 65 patients were positive, with a peak rate of 4.3% that fell below 0.3% after April 2020. Among the 65 positive cases, 3 were presymptomatic and 38 were asymptomatic. Among asymptomatic test-positive patients, 76% had PCR cycle threshold >30 at first detection. Five patients tested newly positive in the immediate postoperative period, exposing 82 employees with 1 case of probable transmission (1.2%). Conclusions The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection identified on preprocedural surveillance was low in our study, which was conducted in an area with limited community spread at the later stage of the study. Universal PPE is protective in procedural settings. Optimal and flexible diagnostic strategies are needed to accomplish and sustain the goals of comprehensive preprocedure surveillance testing.

Worker Protection Standard: Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) 2016

EDIS ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick M. Fishel
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Environmental Protection Agency ◽  
Agricultural Workers ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Protection Agency ◽  
Agricultural Pesticides ◽  
The Us ◽  
Enclosed Space ◽  
Space Production

In 1992, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a comprehensive regulation called the Worker Protection Standard for Agricultural Pesticides (WPS). The WPS covers pesticides used in the outdoor and enclosed space production of plants on farms, forests, and nurseries, as well as greenhouses. The WPS requires agricultural employers to take steps to reduce pesticide-related risks when agricultural workers and pesticide handlers are exposed to these pesticides. The EPA has made several changes to the WPS since it was fully implemented in 1995. On November 2, 2015, the EPA revised the WPS, making significant changes to the rule’s requirements. This document includes those changes related to personal protective equipment (PPE).

scholarly journals The Early Impact of COVID-19 on Ophthalmology Resident Training and Wellness

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (02) ◽  
pp. e292-e297
Author(s):  
Michael Woodfin ◽  
Karine D. Bojikian ◽  
Parisa Taravati ◽  
Leona Ding ◽  
Michele D. Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Residency Training ◽  
Job Search ◽  
Residency Program ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Resident Training ◽  
Generalized Anxiety ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
The Us ◽  
Residency Program Directors

Abstract Objective The aim of this article is to assess the initial impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on ophthalmology resident training and wellness. Design Online national survey of ophthalmology residents distributed by residency program directors and education coordinators of participating programs. Setting US ophthalmology residency programs during the COVID-19 pandemic (May 20th, 2020 to June 10th, 2020). Participants Ophthalmology residents enrolled in the US residency programs currently in postgraduate years two through four of training. Results Two-hundred thirty-six of 785 (30.1%) residents responded to the survey. One-hundred eighteen of 234 (50.4%) residents reported exposure to known COVID-19 positive patients, and of those exposed, 44 of 118 (37.2%) felt that they did not have adequate personal protective equipment. One-hundred ninety-five of 233 (83.7%) residents reported a decrease in primary surgical cases during the pandemic, with 68 (29.2%) reporting a loss of more than 50 primary cases. One-hundred sixty-four of 234 (70.1%) residents were concerned that the pandemic would negatively impact their surgical skills beyond residency, and 15% reported that they were more likely to pursue fellowship due to the pandemic. 31.0% of residents met criteria of burnout, 9.1% were depressed, and 13.4% had generalized anxiety. Concerns about COVID-19 infection were correlated with increased anxiety and burnout during the pandemic. Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic has decreased resident surgical and clinical volumes and has negatively impacted ophthalmology residency training. Residents with increased concern for contracting COVID-19 and those actively engaged in a job search had significantly higher odds of increased anxiety.

scholarly journals The UK national registry of ENT surgeons with coronavirus disease 2019

2020 ◽  
Vol 134 (8) ◽  
pp. 665-669 ◽  
Author(s):  
K Stephenson ◽  
LJ Sowerby ◽  
C Hopkins ◽  
N Kumar
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Significant Proportion ◽  
National Registry ◽  
Service Planning ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Data Collection Period ◽  
Collection Period ◽  
The Uk

AbstractBackgroundENT surgeons are likely to be at high risk of coronavirus disease 2019 exposure.MethodsA national registry of UK ENT surgeons with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 was created with the support of ENT UK. Voluntary entry was made by either the affected individual or a colleague, using a web-based platform.ResultsA four-month data collection period is reported, comprising 73 individuals. Coronavirus disease 2019 was test-confirmed in 35 respondents (47.9 per cent). There was a need for hospitalisation in two cases (2.7 per cent) and tragically one individual died. Symptom onset peaked in March. The majority suspected their exposure to have been in the workplace, with a significant proportion attributing their disease to a lack of personal protective equipment at a time before formal guidance had been introduced.ConclusionThe registry suggests that a significant number of ENT clinicians in the UK have contracted coronavirus disease 2019, and supports the need for tailored personal protective equipment guidance and service planning.

scholarly journals Personal Protective Equipment: Challenges and Strategies to Combat COVID-19 in India: A Narrative Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neeraj Sharma ◽  
Zubeda Hasan ◽  
Anoop Velayudhan ◽  
Emil M. A. ◽  
D. K. Mangal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Public Health Workforce ◽  
Contact Tracing ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Settings ◽  
Public Health Professionals

The current outbreak of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has become a pandemic. All COVID-19-affected countries in the world are implementing containment interventions and trying their best to fight against the disease to halt the further spread of the infection and to reduce mortality. The public health workforce and healthcare staff in clinical settings are playing a crucial role in the early detection of cases, contact tracing and treatment of patients. The availability of personal protective equipment (PPE) and their consistent, proper use by healthcare providers and public health professionals is a crucial factor in combating any infectious disease in a crisis. The requirement of PPE has exponentially increased, as more and more countries are experiencing the COVID-19 pandemic. The rapid spread of the pandemic has created a temporary shortage of PPE in many countries, including India. The lack of PPE has affected the morale of healthcare workers (HCWs) and other frontline warriors in fighting the coronavirus disease, as more than 22,000 health workers in 56 countries have suffered from COVID-19. Some of them have succumbed to it across all countries, including India (WHO). We have reviewed the available literature to understand the challenges in ensuring adequate availability and consistent use of PPE and the strategies for the rational use of PPE in India. Our study reveals that India has responded swiftly to enhance the accessibility of PPE and put in place strategies for the judicious use of PPE to reduce the incidence of the COVID-19 infection to a bare minimum in healthcare settings. In the present article, we report the current status of COVID-19 among HCWs. We have reviewed the challenges and the surge strategies adopted by India to produce or procure good-quality PPE and supply it to all service delivery points in adequate quantities.

scholarly journals COVID-19 War: United Kingdom’s Strategy During the First Wave

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 355-358
Author(s):  
Mrigesh Bhatia ◽  
Charusheela Bhatia ◽  
Vilomi Bhatia
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Diagnostic Tests ◽  
Herd Immunity ◽  
Contact Tracing ◽  
Policy Response ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Equipment Availability ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Second Wave

This opinion piece is a reflection on the UK government’s policy response to the war against the COVID-19 pandemic. In the initial stages, concerns were raised with respect to a lack of effective personal protective equipment, availability of ventilators and diagnostic tests. The early defective strategy based on the flawed assumption of building herd immunity in the population was quickly replaced with isolation and social distancing. Subsequently, testing and contact tracing were adopted which too has been criticised for being ‘too little, too late’. With the possibility of the second wave, the concern is the extent to which the United Kingdom has learnt lessons from the first wave and is in a position to effectively respond to the second wave of COVID-19.

scholarly journals Use of personal protective equipment by gas stations workers: a nursing contribution

2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 193-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurelize Pereira Rocha ◽  
Marta Regina Cezar-Vaz ◽  
Marlise Capa Verde de Almeida ◽  
Clarice Alves Bonow ◽  
Mara Santos da Silva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Exploratory Study ◽  
Rio Grande ◽  
Health Surveillance ◽  
Descriptive Statistics ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Gas Stations ◽  
Preventive Actions ◽  
Quantitative Descriptive ◽  
The City

This study's objective was to identify the use of personal protective equipment by gas stations' workers in the city of Rio Grande, RS, Brazil. This quantitative, descriptive and exploratory study was conducted with 221 workers from 22 gas stations using a questionnaire and non-participative and symmetrical observation. Descriptive statistics were used in the analysis and question quality was controlled through Cronbach's alpha test, which obtained a result of 0.96. The results indicate a predominance of multitasking, while workers self-reported the use of boots, aprons, gloves, masks, goggles, earplugs and uniforms. Observation, however, showed incoherence in the workers' reports, since only boots and uniforms were actually used. The results show there is a need for nurses to implement protective and preventive actions to assure workers are not exposed to risks and hazards, while also encouraging health surveillance.

scholarly journals 428. Assessing the Confidence, Knowledge and Preferences of Hospital Staff with Regards to Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Practices During the COVID-19 Pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S314-S316
Author(s):  
Rachel Brown ◽  
Sharon Markman ◽  
Amanda Brown ◽  
Rukhshan Mian ◽  
Vineet Arora ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Hospital Staff ◽  
Descriptive Statistics ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Knowledge Based ◽  
Hospital Units ◽  
Informative Content ◽  
Effective Use

Abstract Background Effective use of personal protective equipment (PPE) by hospital staff is critical to prevent transmission of COVID-19. This study examines hospital staff confidence in and knowledge of effective PPE use, and their preferences for learning about PPE practices. Methods Three isolation precautions signs were created for use in the care of those with or under investigation for COVID-19 infection: first, a special respiratory precautions sign designed by infection control; and next, two signs outlining proper donning and doffing practices – one created internally with the support of health literacy, and another developed with a design firm (IDEO) using principles of human-centered design (Figure 1). All signs were used for ≥ 10 weeks prior to distribution of a questionnaire (REDCap) to clinical and non-clinical hospital staff. Those who had not worked on hospital units during the pandemic (after March 15, 2020) were excluded. The 38-item survey was sent by supervisors over email between July 14-31, 2020, and examined demographics, confidence in and knowledge of PPE best practices, and preferences for each precaution sign with regards to trustworthiness, ease of following, informative content, and clarity of image/layout. Responses were reported using descriptive statistics. A non-parametric test of trends compared staff preferences across signs. Logistic regression examined the association between answering all knowledge-based questions correctly and staff role and confidence in PPE practices (Stata). Results Of the 531 respondents, 461 were eligible for inclusion. The majority were female, white, and not high risk for COVID-19 (Table 1). Most were confident about PPE use, correctly answered questions examining knowledge of PPE best practices, and found PPE signage helpful (Table 2). Staff preferred the professionally designed sign for informative content (p< 0.01) and clear imagery/layout (p=0.01) (Table 3). Confidence in PPE practices and physician or nurse roles were associated with answering all knowledge-based questions correctly (p< 0.001 and p=0.04, respectively). Conclusion In a convenience sample of hospital staff, most were confident and knowledgeable about PPE use, found PPE signage helpful, and preferred professionally designed signs. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Impact of COVID-19 on Nuclear Medicine in Germany, Austria and Switzerland: An International Survey in April 2020

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (04) ◽  
pp. 294-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lutz S. Freudenberg ◽  
Ulf Dittmer ◽  
Ken Herrmann
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Medicine ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Diagnostic Procedures ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Current Crisis ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Public Versus Private ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Introduction Preparations of health systems to accommodate large number of severely ill COVID-19 patients in March/April 2020 has a significant impact on nuclear medicine departments. Materials and Methods A web-based questionnaire was designed to differentiate the impact of the pandemic on inpatient and outpatient nuclear medicine operations and on public versus private health systems, respectively. Questions were addressing the following issues: impact on nuclear medicine diagnostics and therapy, use of recommendations, personal protective equipment, and organizational adaptations. The survey was available for 6 days and closed on April 20, 2020. Results 113 complete responses were recorded. Nearly all participants (97 %) report a decline of nuclear medicine diagnostic procedures. The mean reduction in the last three weeks for PET/CT, scintigraphies of bone, myocardium, lung thyroid, sentinel lymph-node are –14.4 %, –47.2 %, –47.5 %, –40.7 %, –58.4 %, and –25.2 % respectively. Furthermore, 76 % of the participants report a reduction in therapies especially for benign thyroid disease (-41.8 %) and radiosynoviorthesis (–53.8 %) while tumor therapies remained mainly stable. 48 % of the participants report a shortage of personal protective equipment. Conclusions Nuclear medicine services are notably reduced 3 weeks after the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic reached Germany, Austria and Switzerland on a large scale. We must be aware that the current crisis will also have a significant economic impact on the healthcare system. As the survey cannot adapt to daily dynamic changes in priorities, it serves as a first snapshot requiring follow-up studies and comparisons with other countries and regions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document