Articles: personal-protective-equipment.
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Apr 2016
ReviewPersonal protective equipment for preventing highly infectious diseases due to exposure to contaminated body fluids in healthcare staff.
In epidemics of highly infectious diseases, such as Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) or SARS, healthcare workers (HCW) are at much greater risk of infection than the general population, due to their contact with patients' contaminated body fluids. Contact precautions by means of personal protective equipment (PPE) can reduce the risk. It is unclear which type of PPE protects best, what is the best way to remove PPE, and how to make sure HCWs use PPE as instructed. ⋯ We found very low quality evidence that more breathable types of PPE may not lead to more contamination, but may have greater user satisfaction. We also found very low quality evidence that double gloving and CDC doffing guidance appear to decrease the risk of contamination and that more active training in PPE use may reduce PPE and doffing errors more than passive training. However, the data all come from single studies with high risk of bias and we are uncertain about the estimates of effects.We need simulation studies conducted with several dozens of participants, preferably using a non-pathogenic virus, to find out which type and combination of PPE protects best, and what is the best way to remove PPE. We also need randomised controlled studies of the effects of one type of training versus another to find out which training works best in the long term. HCWs exposed to highly infectious diseases should have their use of PPE registered and should be prospectively followed for their risk of infection.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Chest Compression With Personal Protective Equipment During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Randomized Crossover Simulation Study.
Following a chemical, biological, radiation, and nuclear incident, prompt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) procedure is essential for patients who suffer cardiac arrest. But CPR when wearing personal protection equipment (PPE) before decontamination becomes a challenge for healthcare workers (HCW). Although previous studies have assessed the impact of PPE on airway management, there is little research available regarding the quality of chest compression (CC) when wearing PPE. ⋯ With the use of PPE, a significant decrease of the percentage of effective compressions (41.3 ± 17.1% with PPE vs 67.5 ± 15.6% without PPE, P < 0.001) and the percentage of adequate compressions (67.7 ± 18.9% with PPE vs 80.7 ± 15.5% without PPE, P < 0.001) were observed. Furthermore, the increases in heart rate, mean arterial pressure, and subjective fatigue score values were more obvious with the use of PPE (all P < 0.01). We found significant deterioration of CC performance in HCW with the use of a level-C PPE, which may be a disadvantage for enhancing survival of cardiac arrest.
-
Review Comparative Study
A Comparison of Personal Protective Standards: Caring for Patients With Ebola Virus.
The purpose of this article is to discuss the variance in requirements for personal protective equipment (PPE) used among healthcare workers to treat patients actively infected with the Ebola virus in West Africa. ⋯ The rapid decline in Ebola mortality is multifactorial. The efforts of US military medical personnel likely were a contributing factor in this rapid decline as those international health workers were afforded the latest in PPE training with strict attention to detail. US military medical personnel, in concert with other governmental agencies, created a potent force multiplier in the efforts to curb this deadly infection. The educational initiative was essential to the slowdown in the spread of the Ebola virus in Liberia. Recommendations for a detailed review of the PPE standards and variances in practice from both WHO and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are necessary to standardize processes across international healthcare workers to expedite the care for future infectious disease outbreaks. A possible solution is to modify the PPE process to standardize with the WHO guidelines. Key stakeholders from all levels (staff nurse, clinical nurse specialist, nurse managers, infectious disease experts, etc) need to be heavily involved in this process.
-
Workplace health & safety · Feb 2016
Ebola Care and Lack of Consensus on Personal Protective Respiratory Equipment.
The Ebola epidemic in West Africa presents a considerable occupational risk to the health personnel involved. The principal mode of virus transmission to health care personnel is through direct contact with the patient, although transmission by aerosols through the air may also occur. Many safety protocols have been suggested relating to personal protection and particularly respiratory protection. ⋯ However, the degree of respiratory safety escalates from a mask, to an adequate respirator, and finally to a whole body suit with integrated helmet and positive air pressure. Recent publications demonstrate a lack of consensus on the degree of safety necessary. The step from "safe enough" to being "absolutely safe" seems, in most countries, insurmountable because of costs and logistics.