Literature DB >> 15239724

Practicality of performing medical procedures in chemical protective ensembles.

Alan Garner1, Helen Laurence, Anna Lee.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether certain life saving medical procedures can be successfully performed while wearing different levels of personal protective equipment (PPE), and whether these procedures can be performed in a clinically useful time frame.
METHODS: We assessed the capability of eight medical personnel to perform airway maintenance and antidote administration procedures on manikins, in all four described levels of PPE. The levels are: Level A--a fully encapsulated chemically resistant suit; Level B--a chemically resistant suit, gloves and boots with a full-faced positive pressure supplied air respirator; Level C--a chemically resistant splash suit, boots and gloves with an air-purifying positive or negative pressure respirator; Level D--a work uniform. Time in seconds to inflate the lungs of the manikin with bag-valve-mask, laryngeal mask airway (LMA) and endotracheal tube (ETT) were determined, as was the time to secure LMAs and ETTs with either tape or linen ties. Time to insert a cannula in a manikin was also determined.
RESULTS: There was a significant difference in time taken to perform procedures in differing levels of personal protective equipment (F21,72 = 1.75, P = 0.04). Significant differences were found in: time to lung inflation using an endotracheal tube (A vs. C mean difference and standard error 75.6 +/- 23.9 s, P = 0.03; A vs. D mean difference and standard error 78.6 +/- 23.9 s, P = 0.03); time to insert a cannula (A vs. D mean difference and standard error 63.6 +/- 11.1 s, P < 0.001; C vs. D mean difference and standard error 40.0 +/- 11.1 s, P = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: A significantly greater time to complete procedures was documented in Level A PPE (fully encapsulated suits) compared with Levels C and D. There was however, no significant difference in times between Level B and Level C. The common practice of equipping hospital and medical staff with only Level C protection should be re-evaluated.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15239724     DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-6723.2004.00560.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emerg Med Australas        ISSN: 1742-6723            Impact factor:   2.151


  7 in total

1.  A systematic risk-based strategy to select personal protective equipment for infectious diseases.

Authors:  Rachael M Jones; Susan C Bleasdale; Dayana Maita; Lisa M Brosseau
Journal:  Am J Infect Control       Date:  2019-07-27       Impact factor: 2.918

2.  Personal protection equipment for biological hazards: does it affect tracheal intubation performance?

Authors:  K B Greenland; D Tsui; P Goodyear; M G Irwin
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2007-03-13       Impact factor: 5.262

3.  Maintenance of Skill Proficiency for Emergency Skills With and Without Adjuncts Despite the Use of Level C Personal Protective Equipment.

Authors:  Harsh Sule; Miriam Kulkarni; Gregory Sugalski; Tiffany Murano
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2020-03-27

4.  Systematic review of simulated airway management whilst wearing personal protective equipment.

Authors:  Filippo Sanfilippo; Stefano Tigano; Gaetano J Palumbo; Marinella Astuto; Paolo Murabito
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2020-06-13       Impact factor: 9.166

Review 5.  Resilience and Protection of Health Care and Research Laboratory Workers During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: Analysis and Case Study From an Austrian High Security Laboratory.

Authors:  Martina Loibner; Paul Barach; Stella Wolfgruber; Christine Langner; Verena Stangl; Julia Rieger; Esther Föderl-Höbenreich; Melina Hardt; Eva Kicker; Silvia Groiss; Martin Zacharias; Philipp Wurm; Gregor Gorkiewicz; Peter Regitnig; Kurt Zatloukal
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-07-22

6.  Maintaining Prehospital Intubation Success with COVID-19 Personal Protective Precautions.

Authors:  Pascale Avery; Sam McAleer; David Rawlinson; Stuart Gill; David Lockey
Journal:  Prehosp Disaster Med       Date:  2022-09-12       Impact factor: 2.866

7.  Limiting factors for wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) in a health care environment evaluated in a randomised study.

Authors:  Martina Loibner; Sandra Hagauer; Gerold Schwantzer; Andrea Berghold; Kurt Zatloukal
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-22       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.