The COVID‐19 pandemic, personal protective equipment and respirator: A narrative review

Ha, Jennifer F.

doi:10.1111/ijcp.13578

Cited by 47 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 89 publications

(145 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is evident that among HCW with higher prevalence there has been a greater exposure to infectious patients [ 18 ]. It is probably that personal protection measures could not have been used properly in the first days of the epidemic but personal protection equipment shortages also occurred, which is a direct cause of HCW infection [ 33 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic among health care workers in a secondary teaching hospital in Spain

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a huge challenge to healthcare systems and their personnel worldwide. The study of the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers (HCW), through prevalence studies, will let us know viral expansion, individuals at most risk and the most exposed areas in healthcare organizations. The aim of this study is to gauge the impact of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in our hospital workforce and identify groups and areas at increased risk. Methods and findings This is a cross-sectional and incidence study carried out on healthcare workers based on molecular and serological diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of the 3013 HCW invited to participate, 2439 (80.9%) were recruited, including 674 (22.4%) who had previously consulted at the Occupational Health Service (OHS) for confirmed exposure and/or presenting symptoms suggestive of COVID-19. A total of 411 (16.9%) and 264 (10.8%) healthcare workers were SARS-CoV-2 IgG and rRT-PCR positive, respectively. The cumulative prevalence considering all studies (IgG positive HCW and/or rRT-PCR positive detection) was 485 (19.9%). SARS-CoV-2 IgG-positive patients in whom the virus was not detected were 221 (9.1%); up to 151 of them (68.3%) did not report any compatible symptoms nor consult at the OHS for this reason. Men became more infected than women (25% vs 18.5%, p = 0.0009), including when data were also classified by age. COVID-19 cumulative prevalence among the HCW assigned to medical departments was higher (25.2%) than others, as well as among medical staff (25.4%) compared with other professional categories (p<0.01). Conclusions The global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on HCW of our centre has been 19.9%. Doctors and medical services personnel have had the highest prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but many of them have not presented compatible symptoms. This emphasizes the performance of continuous surveillance methods of the most exposed health personnel and not only based on the appearance of symptoms.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic among health care workers in a secondary teaching hospital in Spain

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Globally, there were high levels of HCW morbidity and mortality with the COVID-19 outbreak. While financial considerations, PPE supply and logistics are clearly important, healthcare systems and governments have occupational health and safety obligations to their HCWs [15]. They require reassurance that they are using the highest level of protection and not putting themselves, their families or colleagues at risk.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge of face masks and attitudes to re-sterilisation among healthcare workers

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction COVID-19 was declared a pandemic in March 2020. With the sudden surge in demand for personal protective equipment (PPE), significant concerns regarding the ongoing availability emerged. One solution proposed is re-sterilisation of respirator masks and this has been commenced in some parts of the world. On review of the literature, very little is documented regarding the knowledge of masks and the attitudes of healthcare workers towards using re-sterilised masks. Methods A comprehensive questionnaire was used to assess general knowledge and attitudes around facemasks and respirators. Results There were 190 respondents. There were significant gaps in knowledge and understanding of when particular face masks should be worn. One-third had significant concerns about ongoing availability. One-third had concerns about the quality of the masks as the pandemic continued. Only 10% of respondents underwent formal face-fitting. Eighty percent of respondents stated they would wear a re-sterilised mask. A further 15% would use a re-sterilised mask but required certain reassurances. Five percent of our respondents would not use a re-sterilised mask under any circumstances. Discussion Ensuring an adequate understanding of face masks is crucial among healthcare workers (HCWs) and this study highlights a need for further education. It also demonstrates a general acceptability among HCWs towards the use of resterilised face masks.

show abstract

“…Os profissionais de saúde constituem um grupo de risco, e representam uma parcela expressiva do número de casos da COVID-19. Estima-se que a proporção de profissionais de saúde infectados, entre os casos confirmados, corresponda à 3,5% a 20% (Ha, 2020). No Brasil até o dia 07 de dezembro de 2020 foram confirmados 414.147 casos confirmados e 1.716 óbitos pela COVI-19 em profissionais de saúde.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Recomendações quanto ao uso de máscaras/ respiradores de proteção por profissionais de saúde em risco de exposição ao sars-cov-2: scoping review

Cavalcante

Almeida

Lima

et al. 2021

RSD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objetivo: Analisar as recomendações governamentais e as evidências científicas quanto ao uso de protetores respiratórios por profissionais de saúde no contexto da pandemia por SARS-CoV-2. Método: Scoping Review, seguido o protocolo proposto pelo Instituto Joanna Briggs (JBI), Versão 2020. Foi utilizada a estratégia PCC (População, Conceito e Contexto), para a formulação da seguinte pergunta norteadora: “Quais as recomendações quanto ao uso de máscaras/respiradores de proteção respiratória por profissionais de saúde frente ao risco de contaminação pelo SARS-CoV-2?”. Foram realizadas buscas em seis bases de dados internacionais e na literatura cinzenta e em sites governamentais de diferentes países, de julho a agosto de 2020. Resultados: foram incluídos 20 estudos publicados em 2020. Sobre a metodologia dos estudos, 1 (5%) estudo descritivo, 1 (5%) revisão narrativa, 2 (10%) revisão sistemática com meta-análise, 2 revisões sistemáticas (10%), 8 (40%) revisão de literatura e 6 (30%) relatório técnico. Conclusão:Há divergências quanto ao: tipo de proteção respiratória em cuidados de rotina, quando não há geração de aerossóis, com estudos que indicam a utilização de máscaras cirúrgicas e outros que recomendam a utilização de um respirador particulado; há indicação de diferentes respiradores particulados de diversos graus de proteção, para o mesmo cenário de exposição clínica, e existe conflito quanto ao cenário de maior exposição para os profissionais de saúde, na discordância de quais procedimentos geram aerossóis.

show abstract

The COVID‐19 pandemic, personal protective equipment and respirator: A narrative review

Cited by 47 publications

References 89 publications

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic among health care workers in a secondary teaching hospital in Spain

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic among health care workers in a secondary teaching hospital in Spain

Knowledge of face masks and attitudes to re-sterilisation among healthcare workers

Recomendações quanto ao uso de máscaras/ respiradores de proteção por profissionais de saúde em risco de exposição ao sars-cov-2: scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About