scholarly journals Assessment of Healthcare Worker Protocol Deviations and Self-Contamination During Personal Protective Equipment Donning and Doffing

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (9) ◽  
pp. 1077-1083 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennie H. Kwon ◽  
Carey-Ann D. Burnham ◽  
Kimberly A. Reske ◽  
Stephen Y. Liang ◽  
Tiffany Hink ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Worker ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Ebola Virus ◽  
Virus Disease ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Contact Precaution ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Ms2 Bacteriophage ◽  
Protocol Deviation

OBJECTIVETo evaluate healthcare worker (HCW) risk of self-contamination when donning and doffing personal protective equipment (PPE) using fluorescence and MS2 bacteriophage.DESIGNProspective pilot study.SETTINGTertiary-care hospital.PARTICIPANTSA total of 36 HCWs were included in this study: 18 donned/doffed contact precaution (CP) PPE and 18 donned/doffed Ebola virus disease (EVD) PPE.INTERVENTIONSHCWs donned PPE according to standard protocols. Fluorescent liquid and MS2 bacteriophage were applied to HCWs. HCWs then doffed their PPE. After doffing, HCWs were scanned for fluorescence and swabbed for MS2. MS2 detection was performed using reverse transcriptase PCR. The donning and doffing processes were videotaped, and protocol deviations were recorded.RESULTSOverall, 27% of EVD PPE HCWs and 50% of CP PPE HCWs made ≥1 protocol deviation while donning, and 100% of EVD PPE HCWs and 67% of CP PPE HCWs made ≥1 protocol deviation while doffing (P=.02). The median number of doffing protocol deviations among EVD PPE HCWs was 4, versus 1 among CP PPE HCWs. Also, 15 EVD PPE protocol deviations were committed by doffing assistants and/or trained observers. Fluorescence was detected on 8 EVD PPE HCWs (44%) and 5 CP PPE HCWs (28%), most commonly on hands. MS2 was recovered from 2 EVD PPE HCWs (11%) and 3 CP PPE HCWs (17%).CONCLUSIONSProtocol deviations were common during both EVD and CP PPE doffing, and some deviations during EVD PPE doffing were committed by the HCW doffing assistant and/or the trained observer. Self-contamination was common. PPE donning/doffing are complex and deserve additional study.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1077–1083

scholarly journals Healthcare Worker Self-Contamination During Standard and Ebola Virus Disease Personal Protective Equipment Doffing

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennie H. Kwon ◽  
Carey-Ann D. Burnham ◽  
Kimberly Reske ◽  
Stephen Liang ◽  
Tiffany Hink ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Worker ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Ebola Virus ◽  
Virus Disease ◽  
Ebola Virus Disease ◽  
Protective Equipment

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.

Challenges in Implementing Ebola Protection Procedures and Personal Protective Equipment Training in a French Maternity Unit

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-103
Author(s):  
Ali Ghanchi
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Ebola Virus ◽  
Virus Disease ◽  
Practical Experience ◽  
Emergency Planning ◽  
Ebola Virus Disease ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Maternity Unit

The current Ebola crisis has been described as the “worst outbreak in history” and even though there is an unlikely chance that the epidemic will spread to France, emergency planners have taken this eventuality into consideration. In our maternity unit in Paris, midwife managers were allocated the task of implementing emergency planning into reality and as a result were faced with several challenges that came from various sources. This article discusses problems faced in adapting procedures, training personnel, and testing whether our procedures were effective in preventing Ebola virus disease in our maternity unit. From practical experience, it can be concluded that procedures functioned well and that staff were prepared and well equipped to face this challenging scenario.

Personal protective equipment for the Ebola virus disease: A comparison of 2 training programs

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (12) ◽  
pp. 1281-1287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrique Casalino ◽  
Eugenio Astocondor ◽  
Juan Carlos Sanchez ◽  
David Enrique Díaz-Santana ◽  
Carlos del Aguila ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Ebola Virus ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Virus Disease ◽  
Ebola Virus Disease ◽  
Protective Equipment

scholarly journals Psychological Impact of Covid-19 Pandemic on the Healthcare Workers of a Tertiary Care Hospital of Lahore

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-50
Author(s):  
Maria Aslam ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Distress ◽  
Psychological Stress ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Tertiary Care Hospital ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Psychological Impact ◽  
Family Members ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Care Hospital

Background: The psychological stress associated with the COVID-19 pandemic can have long-term effects on the health and coping abilities of HCWs. COVID 19 has exhausted the healthcare workers globally both physically and mentally. This article focuses on the Psychological stresses faced by the healthcare workers of a tertiary setup. Objective: To determine the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the healthcare workers (HCWs) of a tertiary care hospital of Lahore. Study Design: Descriptive, cross-sectional study. Settings: Sharif Medical City Hospital, Lahore Pakistan. Duration: From July 2020 to August 2020. Methodology: A total of 82 healthcare workers were enrolled in the study on a voluntary basis by convenient sampling technique and filled an online questionnaire including demographic information, informed consent, validated Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scales (DASS-21) and the factors causing psychological distress. The data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 24. Results: Out of 82 HCWs, 47(57.3%) had stress, 42(51.2%) had depression and 29(35.4%) had anxiety. Most of the HCWs with stress had mild and moderate stress. The majority of the HCWs were suffering from moderate depression and moderate anxiety. The most common factor causing psychological stress among HCWs was the fear of getting infected with COVID-19 followed by chances of spreading the disease to family members and the non-availability of personal protective equipment. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has a great psychological impact on the healthcare workers in Pakistan. A large proportion of HCWs suffered from stress (57.3%), depression (51.2%) and anxiety (35.4%). The most common factors causing psychological distress in HCWs were the fear of getting infected with COVID-19 (80.5%), chances of spreading the disease to family members (65.9%) and the non-availability of personal protective equipment (59.8%).

scholarly journals Incorporating health workers’ perspectives into a WHO guideline on personal protective equipment developed during an Ebola virus disease outbreak

F1000Research ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saskia Den Boon ◽  
Constanza Vallenas ◽  
Mauricio Ferri ◽  
Susan L. Norris
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
West Africa ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Ebola Virus ◽  
Expert Panel ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Virus Disease ◽  
Ebola Virus Disease ◽  
World Health ◽  
Protective Equipment

Background: Ebola virus disease (EVD) health facility transmission can result in infection and death of health workers. The World Health Organization (WHO) supports countries in preparing for and responding to public health emergencies, which often require developing new guidance in short timelines with scarce evidence. The objective of this study was to understand frontline physicians’ and nurses’ perspectives about personal protective equipment (PPE) use during the 2014-2016 EVD outbreak in West Africa and to incorporate these findings into the development process of a WHO rapid advice guideline. Methods: We surveyed frontline physicians and nurses deployed to West Africa between March and September of 2014. Results: We developed the protocol, obtained ethics approval, delivered the survey, analysed the data and presented the findings as part of the evidence-to-decision tables at the expert panel meeting where the recommendations were formulated within eight weeks. Forty-four physicians and nurses responded to the survey. They generally felt at low or extremely low risk of virus transmission with all types of PPE used. Eye protection reduced the ability to provide care, mainly due to impaired visibility because of fogging. Heat and dehydration were a major issue for 76% of the participants using goggles and for 64% using a hood. Both gowns and coveralls were associated with significant heat stress and dehydration. Most participants (59%) were very confident that they were using PPE correctly. Conclusion: Our study demonstrated that it was possible to incorporate primary data on end-users’ preferences into a rapid advice guideline for a public health emergency in difficult field conditions. Health workers perceived a balance between transmission protection and ability to care for patients effectively while wearing PPE. These findings were used by the guideline development expert panel to formulate WHO recommendations on PPE for frontline providers caring for EVD patients in outbreak conditions.

Personal protective equipment processes and rationale for the Nebraska Biocontainment Unit during the 2014 activations for Ebola virus disease

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 340-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth L. Beam ◽  
Shelly Schwedhelm ◽  
Kathleen Boulter ◽  
Christopher Kratochvil ◽  
John Lowe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Ebola Virus ◽  
Virus Disease ◽  
Ebola Virus Disease ◽  
Protective Equipment
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document