scholarly journals Personal Protective Equipment used for Infection Control in Dental Practices

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
AP Pandit ◽  
Neha Bhagatkar ◽  
Mallika Ramachandran
Keyword(s):  
Infection Control ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Dental Equipment ◽  
Dental Practices ◽  
A Current ◽  
Dental Professionals ◽  
Total Market ◽  
Dental Products

ABSTRACT The potential size of India's dental market is vast and is expected to become one of the largest single country markets for overseas dental products and materials. The total market for the dental equipment and materials is estimated to be around US$ 90 million annually. There are more than 1, 80,000 dental professionals in India, 297 dental institutes and over 5,000 dental laboratories. Thus, there is a huge potential for the market of personal protective equipment (PPE) used for infection control in dentistry. India's market for dental products is extremely dynamic, with a current estimated growth rate of between 25 and 30%. Overall, the dental market is expected to grow by 20%.1 The personal protective equipment used in the practice of dentistry in India. Since dentistry is predominantly a surgical discipline, it leads to exposure to the pathogenic microorganisms harbored in blood, body fluids and other potentially infectious material. Thus, the use of adequate and good quality PPE is imperative for infection control in dental practice. With the growing potential of India's dental market, the growth of the market for PPE is inevitable. But, it is equally important to raise the awareness among dental community about good quality products adhering to required standards to prevent the usage of low-cost, uncertified and sub-standard products that decrease the safety levels of personnel. The present study is conducted with a view to observe the personal protective equipment used for infection control in dental practices. How to cite this article Pandit AP, Bhagatkar N, Ramachandran M. Personal Protective Equipment used for Infection Control in Dental Practices. Int J Res Foundation Hosp Healthc Adm 2015;3(1):10-12.

scholarly journals COVID-19 Guidelines to Protect Healthcare Workers at Hospitals and Dental Professionals at Dental Office

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bassel Tarakji ◽  
Mohammad Zakaria Nassani ◽  
Faisal Mehsen Alali ◽  
Abdulwahab A. Abuderman
Keyword(s):  
Infection Control ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Dental Treatment ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
The Body ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Dental Office ◽  
Control Procedures ◽  
Dental Professionals

BACKGROUND፡ Coronavirus disease 2019 is an infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. This study aimed to address the preventive procedures to protect healthcare workers at hospital to avoid COVID-19, and infection control procedures to protect dental professionals in dental office.METHODS: We conducted a search of published articles from PubMed, google scholar databases using key words such as COVID-19, healthcare worker, infection control, and dental practice. Relevant articles were identified and reviewed. Most published papers were clinical reports and case studies. We have selected some of the current published papers written in English in 2020.RESULTS: Infection control procedures to protect health workers at hospitals, and dental professionals at dental office were summurised and presented. Infection control procedures for healthcare workers at hospitals include Personal protective equipment, Korea filter (KF)94 respirator, goggles, face protector,disposable waterproof long-arm gown, and gloves, and others. Extra-protection procedures should be taken with old and vulnerable healthcare workers. Dental professionals should evaluate patients in advance before starting dental treatment. Aerosols generating procedures should be avoided and personal protective equipment should be used. Dental treatment should be restricted to emergency cases only.CONCLUSION: Old medical staff should be in safer distance to avoid infection, but young physicians and nurses should work at frontline as their immunity is better than their colleagues at old age. Screening patients and measurement of the body temperature are essential measures before dental treatment.

scholarly journals 478. Psychological Distress among Infectious Disease Physicians during the Response to the COVID-19 Outbreak in the Republic of Korea

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S305-S305
Author(s):  
Se Yoon Park ◽  
Bongyoung Kim ◽  
Dong Sik Jung ◽  
Sook In Jung ◽  
Won Sup Oh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Infectious Disease ◽  
Psychological Distress ◽  
Infection Control ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Text Message ◽  
Disease Outbreaks ◽  
Maslach Burnout Inventory ◽  
Republic Of Korea ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
The Republic

Abstract Background This study aimed to investigate psychological distress among infectious disease (ID) physicians during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in the Republic of Korea. Methods Using an online-based survey link sent via text message and email, we conducted a survey from April 21 to 25, 2020, targeting all ID physicians currently working in ID (n = 265). The questionnaire was based on the Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey and the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scales, and information was collected on factors protecting against psychological distress and difficulties in relation to COVID-19. Results Of 265 ID physicians, 115 (43.3%) responded, showing burnout (97, 90.4%), depression (20, 17.4%), anxiety (23, 20.0%), and stress (5, 4.3%). There were no differences in terms of distress between ID physicians who were directly involved in the care of patients with COVID-19 or not (Table 1). Greater than 50% of physicians valued their work and felt recognized by others, whereas < 10% indicated that sufficient human and financial support and private time had been provided during the outbreak. The most challenging issues concerned a lack of human resources for COVID-19 treatment or infection control, a shortage of personal protective equipment or airborne infection isolation rooms, pressure for research, and lack of guidelines for COVID-19 management (Figure 1). Table 1. Figure 1. Difficulties in response to the COVID-19 outbreak. Abbreviations: COVID-19, coronavirus disease 19; HCWs, healthcare workers; ICPs, infection control practitioners; IRB, Institutional Review Board; PPE, personal protective equipment Conclusion During the COVID-19 outbreak in the ROK, most respondents reported psychological distress. Preparing strategies for infectious disease outbreaks that support ID physicians is essential. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

COVID-19 in schools: Infection control, personal protective equipment and the latest CPR advice

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 129-132
Author(s):  
Emma Hammett
Keyword(s):  
Infection Control ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Educational Settings

There are a number of challenges in order to safely return more children to school. Emma Hammett provides an overview of the latest guidance on infection control, personal protective equipment and CPR for educational settings.

scholarly journals Retrospective Study on Personal Protective Equipment During Pandemic Link to Outbreak of Carbpenem-Resistant Enterobacteriace

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (S1) ◽  
pp. s9-s10
Author(s):  
Kenisha Evans ◽  
Jennifer LeRose ◽  
Angela Beatriz Cruz ◽  
Lavina Jabbo ◽  
Teena Chopra
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Infection Control ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Horizontal Transmission ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Local Health ◽  
Infection Rates ◽  
Infection Control Measures ◽  
The Impact

Background: In 2019, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), had cost the lives of >35,000 patients, particularly the most virulent plasmid-mediated New Delhi metallo-β-lactamase (NDM). Although healthcare systems normally have strict surveillance and infection control measures for CRE, the rapid emergence of novel SAR-CoV-2 and COVID-19 led to a shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE) and medical supplies. As a result, routine infection practices, such as contact precautions, were violated. Studies have shown this depletion and shift in resources compromised the control of infections such CRE leading to rising horizontal transmission. Method: A retrospective study was conducted at a tertiary healthcare system in Detroit, Michigan, to determine the impact of PPE shortages during the COVID-19 pandemic on NDM infection rates. The following periods were established during 2020 based on PPE availability: (1) pre-PPE shortage (January–June), (2) PPE shortage (July–October), and (3) post-PPE shortage (November–December). Rates of NDM per 10,000 patient days were compared between periods using the Wilcoxon signed rank-sum test. Isolates were confirmed resistant by NDM by molecular typing performed by the Michigan State Health Department. Patient characteristics were gathered by medical chart review and patient interviews by telephone. Results: Overall, the average rate of NDM infections was 1.82 ±1.5 per 10,000 patient days. Rates during the PPE shortage were significantly higher, averaging 3.6 ±1.1 cases per 10,000 patient days (P = .02). During this time, several infections occurred within patients on the same unit and/or patients with same treating team, suggesting possible horizontal transmission. Once PPE stock was replenished and isolation practices were reinstated, NDM infection rates decreased to 0.77 ±1.1 per 10,000 patient days. Conclusion: Control of CRE requires strategic planning with active surveillance, antimicrobial constructs, and infection control measures. The study illustrates that in times of crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the burden of effective infection control requires much more multidisciplinary efforts to prevent unintentional lapses in patient safety. A swift response by the state and local health departments at a tertiary-care healthcare center conveyed a positive mitigation of the highest clinical threats and decreased horizontal transmission of disease.Funding: NoDisclosures: None

scholarly journals An innovative low-cost personal protective equipment gown made by biomedical trash bags

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-77
Author(s):  
Anupama Pandey ◽  
Anita Singh ◽  
Shivani Bajpai ◽  
Kirti M Naranje ◽  
Girish Gupta
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Protective Equipment

scholarly journals A mask-based infection control method for screening endoscopy may prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission and relieve staff anxiety

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 205031212110470
Author(s):  
Yuji Nadatani ◽  
Akira Higashimori ◽  
Shingo Takashima ◽  
Hirotsugu Maruyama ◽  
Koji Otani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Infection Control ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Medical Staff ◽  
Fluorescent Dyes ◽  
Control Method ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Health Checkup ◽  
Screening Endoscopy ◽  
Droplet Trajectory

Objectives: Endoscopy confers high risk for acquiring coronavirus disease 2019. Although guidelines recommend that medical staff use personal protective equipment, no infection control equipment have been established for patients. This study aimed to clarify the usefulness of two face masks we had designed for transnasal and transoral endoscopy. Methods: The efficacy of the masks was evaluated by simulating coughing in a mannequin with fluorescent dyes and mapping the droplet trajectory and number. The number of aerosols generated during endoscopy was clinically evaluated in the endoscopy room. Overall, 4356 screening endoscopies were performed with the patients wearing our masks at Medcity21, a health checkup facility, between June and December 2020; the effects of the masks on the patient’s condition were evaluated retrospectively. An 11-item paper-based survey was performed by the endoscopy staff 6 months after the adoption of the mask-based infection control method. Results: Use of both masks reduced the number of droplets released during the simulation. Clinically, the use of both masks did not affect the patients’ conditions during endoscopy and prevented an increase in the aerosols in the endoscopy room. This mask-based infection control method was favorably received, and all staff indicated that understanding the efficacy of our mask-based infection control reduced their anxiety regarding infection. Until December 2020, none of our staff had contracted SARS-CoV-2. Conclusion: Our mask-based infection control method is easy to adopt, inexpensive, and effective; understanding its effectiveness may help ease the fear of infection among endoscopy staff.

The challenge of infection control in patients' homes

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 168-174
Author(s):  
Drew Payne ◽  
Martin Peache
Keyword(s):  
Infectious Disease ◽  
Disease Management ◽  
Hand Hygiene ◽  
Infection Control ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Cross Infection ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Unique Challenge ◽  
Clinical Equipment

Infection control is the responsibility of all nurses, but, traditionally, it has been seen as a priority only in hospitals. Infection control does not stop when a patient is discharged home, but should be practiced wherever clinical care takes place. Community nurses face a unique challenge as they work in patients' homes, and they must manage infection control in that unique environment. This article looks at practical ways to maintain infection control in patients' homes. It covers hand hygiene and personal protective equipment (PPE), including the five moments of hand hygiene, appropriate hand hygiene, the use of all PPE and when gloves are required and when they are not. It also discusses managing clinical equipment, both that taken into the home and that left with a patient, including decontamination, safe storage of sharps and waste management. It touches upon what can be done in a patient's home to reduce the risk of contamination, as well as infectious disease management, including specimens and wound infection management. Lastly, it talks about cross-infection and why staff health is also important.

scholarly journals An anaesthetic and intensive care perspective on infection control measures for the prevention of airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2

2020 ◽  
Vol 81 (9) ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Hazel R O'Mahony ◽  
Daniel S Martin
Keyword(s):  
Infection Control ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Respiratory Viruses ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Appropriate Use ◽  
Airborne Transmission ◽  
Infection Control Measures ◽  
Current Guidance

Guidance regarding appropriate use of personal protective equipment in hospitals is in constant flux as research into SARS-COV-2 transmission continues to develop our understanding of the virus. The risk associated with procedures classed as ‘aerosol generating’ is under constant debate. Current guidance is largely based on pragmatic and cautious logic, as there is little scientific evidence of aerosolization and transmission of respiratory viruses associated with procedures. The physical properties of aerosol particles which may contain viable virus have implications for the safe use of personal protective equipment and infection control protocols. As elective work in the NHS is reinstated, it is important that the implications of the possibility of airborne transmission of the virus in hospitals are more widely understood. This will facilitate appropriate use of personal protective equipment and help direct further research into the true risks of aerosolization during these procedures to allow safe streamlining of services for staff and patients.

scholarly journals Personal protective equipment in health care: Can online infection control courses transfer knowledge and improve proper selection and use?

2008 ◽  
Vol 36 (10) ◽  
pp. e33-e37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chun-Yip Hon ◽  
Bruce Gamage ◽  
Elizabeth Ann Bryce ◽  
Justin LoChang ◽  
Annalee Yassi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Infection Control ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Proper Selection

The Feasibility of an Infection Control “Safe Zone” in a Spinal Cord Injury Unit

2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (6) ◽  
pp. 714-716 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keshonna Lones ◽  
Swetha Ramanathan ◽  
Margaret Fitzpatrick ◽  
Jennifer N. Hill ◽  
Marylou Guihan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Spinal Cord Injury ◽  
Infection Control ◽  
Healthcare Worker ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Safe Zone ◽  
Infect Control Hosp ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Cord Injury

We report on healthcare worker use of a safe zone (outside a 3-foot perimeter around the patient’s bed) and personal protective equipment in 2 inpatient spinal cord injury/disorder units. Workers remained within the safe zone during 22% of observations but were less compliant with personal protective equipment inside the zone.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;37:714–716

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document