scholarly journals SKIN DISEASES CAUSED BY THE SARS-COV-2 VIRUS AND THEIR INCREASE DURING THE USE OF PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 265-270
Author(s):  
Justyna Olszewska ◽  
Anna Charuta ◽  
Jerzy Ładny ◽  
Klaudiusz Nadolny
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Skin Diseases ◽  
Skin Barrier ◽  
Hand Eczema ◽  
Hand Washing ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Skin Symptoms

The aim of the study was to present skin diseases that occur during the Sars-CoV-2 pandemic, especially among healthcare workers. Literature data on skin symptoms associated with COVID-19, frequently reported, e.g. by healthcare workers in the last months of the pandemic. Properly built, healthy, undamaged skin is our protection. It is extremely important for our health during the COVID-19 pandemic, and especially for people working in the health service. There is an increasing number of reports of irritating dermatitis among healthcare workers due to the increased need to wear personal protective equipment and more frequent hand washing than before the pandemic. Overzealous use of disinfectants and frequent hand washing can lead to disturbances in the functioning of the skin barrier, which in turn can lead to diseases such as hand eczema. This systematic review focuses on all skin problems related to COVID-19, including primary and secondary COVID-related cutaneous presentations. Skin diseases caused by Sars-CoV-2 virus should be monitored.

scholarly journals Personal protective equipment for reducing the risk of COVID-19 infection among healthcare workers involved in emergency trauma surgery during the pandemic: a systematic review protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dylan P Griswold ◽  
Andres Gempeler ◽  
Angelos Kolias ◽  
Peter J. Hutchinson ◽  
Andres M. Rubiano
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Trauma Surgery ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Cochrane Central Register

ABSTRACTObjectiveThe objective of this broad evidence synthesis is to identify and summarize the available literature regarding the efficacy of different personal protective equipment (PPE) for reducing the risk of COVID-19 infection in health personnel caring for patients undergoing trauma surgery in low-resource environments (LREs).IntroductionMany healthcare facilities in low-and middle-income countries are inadequately resourced and may lack optimal organization and governance, especially concerning surgical health systems. COVID-19 has the potential to decimate these already strained surgical healthcare services unless health systems take stringent measures to protect healthcare workers from viral exposure and ensure the continuity of specialized care for the patients.Inclusion criteriaThis review will preferentially consider systematic reviews of experimental and quasi-experimental studies, as well as individual studies of such designs, evaluating the effect of different PPE on the risk of COVID-19 infection in healthcare workers (HCWs) involved in emergency trauma surgery.MethodsWe will conduct several searches in the L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence) platform for COVID-19, a system that performs automated regular searches in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and over thirty other sources. The search results will be presented according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram. Critical appraisal of the eligible studies for methodological quality will be conducted. Data will be extracted using the standardized data extraction tool in Covidence. Studies will, when possible, be pooled in a statistical meta-analysis using JBI SUMARI. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach for grading the certainty of evidence will be followed, and a Summary of Findings (SoF) will be created.Systematic review registration numberCRD42020198267

scholarly journals Evidence-Based, Cost-Effective Interventions To Suppress The COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl-Etienne Juneau ◽  
Tomas Pueyo ◽  
Matt Bell ◽  
Genevieve Gee ◽  
Pablo Collazzo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Hand Washing ◽  
Contact Tracing ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
School Closures ◽  
Effective Interventions ◽  
Quality Evidence

ABSTRACTBackgroundIn an unparalleled global response, during the COVID-19 pandemic, 90 countries asked 3.9 billion people to stay home. Yet some countries avoided lockdowns and focused on other strategies, like contact tracing and case isolation. How effective and cost-effective are these strategies? We aimed to provide a comprehensive summary of the evidence on pandemic control, with a focus on cost-effectiveness.MethodsFollowing PRISMA systematic review guidelines, MEDLINE (1946 to April week 2, 2020) and Embase (1974 to April 17, 2020) were searched using a range of terms related to pandemic control. Articles reporting on the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of at least one intervention were included and grouped into higher-quality evidence (randomized trials) and lower-quality evidence (other study designs).ResultsWe found 1,653 papers; 62 were included. Higher-quality evidence was only available to support the effectiveness of hand washing and face masks. Modelling studies indicated that these measures are highly cost-effective. For other interventions, lower-quality evidence suggested that: (1) the most cost-effective interventions are swift contact tracing and case isolation, surveillance networks, protective equipment for healthcare workers, and early vaccination (when available); (2) home quarantines and stockpiling antivirals are less cost-effective; (3) social distancing measures like workplace and school closures are effective but costly, making them the least cost-effective options; (4) combinations are more cost-effective than single interventions; (5) interventions are more cost-effective when adopted early and for severe viruses like SARS-CoV-2. For H1N1 influenza, contact tracing was estimated to be 4,363 times more cost-effective than school closures ($2,260 vs. $9,860,000 per death prevented).ConclusionsA cautious interpretation of the evidence suggests that for COVID-19: (1) social distancing is effective but costly, especially when adopted late and (2) adopting as early as possible a combination of interventions that includes hand washing, face masks, ample protective equipment for healthcare workers, and swift contact tracing and case isolation is likely to be the most cost-effective strategy.FundingLP holds the Canada Research Chair in Community Approaches and Health Inequalities (CRC 950232541). This funding source had no role in the design, conduct, or reporting of the study.

scholarly journals Microwave- and Heat-Based Decontamination for Facemask Personal Protective Equipment (PPE): Protocol for a Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dayre McNally ◽  
Katie O'Hearn ◽  
Shira Gertsman ◽  
Margaret Sampson ◽  
Lindsey Sikora ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Children's Hospital ◽  
Surgical Masks ◽  
Children’S Hospital ◽  
Eastern Ontario

During the COVID-19 pandemic, a shortage of PPE (namely surgical masks, N95 masks, and gowns) has been experienced by some hospitals and could be expected in others due to a rapidly increased need. One method of addressing the issue of PPE shortage is to decontaminate and re-use PPE. The CDC specifically recommends N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) for healthcare workers who are interacting with patients with COVID-19.There are anecdotal reports and published literature evaluating the potential of microwave and heat methods as an effective method for FFR decontamination for reuse, with mixed reports of impact on structural integrity. To date this literature has not been comprehensively synthesized and the purpose of this review is to systematically review the existing literature on microwave and heat-based decontamination of facemask PPE.This information will be used to contribute to PPE decontamination protocols at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario and shared with other hospitals in Ontario, Canada, and internationally.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Disinfectants for Decontamination of N95 and SN95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators: Protocol for a Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katie O'Hearn ◽  
Richard J Webster ◽  
Anne Tsampalieros ◽  
Margaret Sampson ◽  
Lindsey Sikora ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hydrogen Peroxide ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Surgical Masks ◽  
Eastern Ontario

During the COVID-19 pandemic, a shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE), namely surgical masks, N95 masks, and gowns, has been experienced by some hospitals and could be expected in others due to a rapidly increased need. One method of addressing the shortage is to decontaminate and re-use PPE. The Centres for Disease Control (CDC) specifically recommends N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) for healthcare workers who are interacting with patients with COVID-19. There are anecdotal reports and published literature evaluating the potential of using disinfectants, such as hydrogen peroxide and bleach to decontaminate FFRs, with mixed reports of impact on structural integrity. To date this literature has not been comprehensively synthesized and the purpose of this review is to systematically review the existing literature on the use of disinfectants for the decontamination of facemask PPE.This information will be used to contribute to FFR decontamination protocols at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario and shared with other hospitals in Ontario, Canada, and internationally.

scholarly journals Comparison of beautician and hairdressing apprentices with regard to skin health and skin barrier function

2020 ◽  
Vol 71 (3) ◽  
pp. 190-196
Author(s):  
Željka Babić ◽  
Tea Samardžić ◽  
Jelena Macan
Keyword(s):  
Skin Diseases ◽  
Clinical Symptoms ◽  
Standard Procedure ◽  
Skin Barrier ◽  
Severity Index ◽  
Transepidermal Water Loss ◽  
Hand Eczema ◽  
Skin Barrier Function ◽  
Practical Training ◽  
Skin Symptoms

AbstractHairdressing and beautician apprentices are at high risk of occupational skin diseases. Our objective was to compare the prevalence of skin symptoms and the condition of skin barrier between them at the end of vocational training. We recruited 101 hairdressing and 76 beautician apprentices (overall median age 17 years), who reported their history of skin symptoms through the Croatian translation of the Nordic Occupational Skin Questionnaire (NOSQ-2002) and had their hand skin clinically examined and evaluated with the Osnabrück Hand Eczema Severity Index (OHSI). Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) was measured following the standard procedure. Hairdressing apprentices reported significantly higher prevalence of hand/wrist eczema or urticaria than beautician apprentices (35 % vs 25 %, respectively; P=0.041) and higher severity of current hand eczema [median (range) 1.5 (0–8) vs 0.5 (0–4), respectively; P<0.001] and had higher hand TEWL values in those who washed their hands >20 times a day [median (interquartile range): 24.4 (19.7–33.7) vs 18.8 (15.4–23.2) g/ m2/h, respectively; P<0.001). Hairdressing apprentices had more severe clinical symptoms on the hands, and 83 % of those who reported eczema also reported that exacerbation occurred during practical training in comparison to 38 % of beautician apprentices. Our study is the first to report occupational hand and forearm skin issues in the beautician apprentices and also suggests that more effort is needed to improve training about safety at work, which should be specifically tailored for these two trades.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document