Articles: personal-protective-equipment.
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Jul 2019
Personal 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 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (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 HCW 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. Alterations to PPE, such as tabs to grab may decrease contamination. Double gloving, following CDC doffing guidance, and spoken instructions during doffing may reduce contamination and increase compliance. Face-to-face training in PPE use may reduce errors more than video or folder based training. Because data come from single small studies with high risk of bias, we are uncertain about the estimates of effects.We still need randomised controlled trials to find out which training works best in the long term. We need better simulation studies conducted with several dozen participants to find out which PPE protects best, and what is the safest way to remove PPE. Consensus on the best way to conduct simulation of exposure and assessment of outcome is urgently needed. HCW exposed to highly infectious diseases should have their use of PPE registered and should be prospectively followed for their risk of infection in the field.
-
J Infect Public Health · Jul 2019
Use of personal protective equipment to protect against respiratory infections in Pakistan: A systematic review.
Like other low-income countries, limited data are available on the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in Pakistan. We conducted a systematic review of studies on PPE use for respiratory infections in healthcare settings in Pakistan. MEDLINE, Embase and Goggle Scholar were searched for clinical, epidemiological and laboratory-based studies in English, and 13 studies were included; all were observational/cross-sectional studies. ⋯ Compliance with PPE use was low among healthcare workers, and reuse of PPE was reported. Clear policies on the use of PPE and available PPE are needed to avoid inappropriate practices that could result in the spread of infection. Large, multimethod studies are recommended on PPE use to inform national infection-control guidelines.
-
Turk Gogus Kalp Dama · Jun 2019
ReviewPerioperative planning for cardiovascular operations in the COVID-19 pandemic.
Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is a serious health concern which alert all healthcare professionals worldwide. There are two main issues caused by this pandemic regarding for the healthcare system. ⋯ Second, it is essential to perform surgery and intensive care unit follow-up in a setting where the infection prevention measures are followed for primary patients requiring emergency cardiovascular surgery. In this article, we present necessary precautions to be exercised to provide the patient safety and the highest level of protection for the surgical team.
-
Personal protective equipment (PPE) is defined as equipment that protects the wearer's body against health/safety risks at work. Gloves cause many dermatoses. Non-glove PPE constitutes a wide array of garments. Dermatoses resulting from these have hitherto not been documented. ⋯ Clothing, footwear, facemasks and headgear need to be recognized as causes of dermatoses occurring at body sites less commonly associated with occupational skin disease.
-
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.