Literature DB >> 24552359

BSL-3 laboratory practices in the United States: comparison of select agent and non-select agent facilities.

Stephanie L Richards, Victoria C Pompei, Alice Anderson.   

Abstract

New construction of biosafety level 3 (BSL-3) laboratories in the United States has increased in the past decade to facilitate research on potential bioterrorism agents. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention inspect BSL-3 facilities and review commissioning documentation, but no single agency has oversight over all BSL-3 facilities. This article explores the extent to which standard operating procedures in US BSL-3 facilities vary between laboratories with select agent or non-select agent status. Comparisons are made for the following variables: personnel training, decontamination, personal protective equipment (PPE), medical surveillance, security access, laboratory structure and maintenance, funding, and pest management. Facilities working with select agents had more complex training programs and decontamination procedures than non-select agent facilities. Personnel working in select agent laboratories were likely to use powered air purifying respirators, while non-select agent laboratories primarily used N95 respirators. More rigorous medical surveillance was carried out in select agent workers (although not required by the select agent program) and a higher level of restrictive access to laboratories was found. Most select agent and non-select agent laboratories reported adequate structural integrity in facilities; however, differences were observed in personnel perception of funding for repairs. Pest management was carried out by select agent personnel more frequently than non-select agent personnel. Our findings support the need to promote high quality biosafety training and standard operating procedures in both select agent and non-select agent laboratories to improve occupational health and safety.

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24552359      PMCID: PMC3934440          DOI: 10.1089/bsp.2013.0060

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biosecur Bioterror        ISSN: 1538-7135


  16 in total

1.  Research gaps in protecting healthcare workers from SARS and other respiratory pathogens: an interdisciplinary, multi-stakeholder, evidence-based approach.

Authors:  Annalee Yassi; David Moore; J Mark Fitzgerald; Philip Bigelow; Chun-Yip Hon; Elizabeth Bryce
Journal:  J Occup Environ Med       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 2.162

2.  High-containment biodefense research laboratories: meeting report and center recommendations.

Authors:  Gigi Kwik Gronvall; Joe Fitzgerald; Allison Chamberlain; Thomas V Inglesby; Tara O'Toole
Journal:  Biosecur Bioterror       Date:  2007-03

3.  Synthetic biology. Attempt to patent artificial organism draws a protest.

Authors:  Jocelyn Kaiser
Journal:  Science       Date:  2007-06-15       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Implementation of a personnel reliability program as a facilitator of biosafety and biosecurity culture in BSL-3 and BSL-4 laboratories.

Authors:  Jacki J Higgins; Patrick Weaver; J Patrick Fitch; Barbara Johnson; R Marene Pearl
Journal:  Biosecur Bioterror       Date:  2013-06-07

5.  Billions for biodefense: federal agency biodefense funding, FY2008-FY2009.

Authors:  Crystal Franco
Journal:  Biosecur Bioterror       Date:  2008-06

6.  It's time for a centralized registry of laboratory-acquired infections.

Authors:  Kamaljit Singh
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2011-08-04       Impact factor: 53.440

7.  Comparative surface-to-hand and fingertip-to-mouth transfer efficiency of gram-positive bacteria, gram-negative bacteria, and phage.

Authors:  P Rusin; S Maxwell; C Gerba
Journal:  J Appl Microbiol       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 3.772

Review 8.  Laboratory-associated infections and biosafety.

Authors:  D L Sewell
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 26.132

9.  Possible transmission by fomites of respiratory syncytial virus.

Authors:  C B Hall; R G Douglas; J M Geiman
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  1980-01       Impact factor: 5.226

10.  Framework for leadership and training of Biosafety Level 4 laboratory workers.

Authors:  James W Le Duc; Kevin Anderson; Marshall E Bloom; James E Estep; Heinz Feldmann; Joan B Geisbert; Thomas W Geisbert; Lisa Hensley; Michael Holbrook; Peter B Jahrling; Thomas G Ksiazek; George Korch; Jean Patterson; John P Skvorak; Hana Weingartl
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 6.883

View more
  5 in total

1.  Information security for compliance with select agent regulations.

Authors:  Nick Lewis; Mark J Campbell; Carole R Baskin
Journal:  Health Secur       Date:  2015 May-Jun

2.  Preclinical coronavirus studies and pathology: Challenges of the high-containment laboratory.

Authors:  Victoria K Baxter; Stephanie A Montgomery
Journal:  Vet Pathol       Date:  2022-04-11       Impact factor: 3.157

3.  Feasibility of establishing a biosafety level 3 tuberculosis culture laboratory of acceptable quality standards in a resource-limited setting: an experience from Uganda.

Authors:  Willy Ssengooba; Sebastian J Gelderbloem; Gerald Mboowa; Anne Wajja; Carolyn Namaganda; Philippa Musoke; Harriet Mayanja-Kizza; Moses Lutaakome Joloba
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2015-01-15

Review 4.  Biosafety and Biosecurity in European Containment Level 3 Laboratories: Focus on French Recent Progress and Essential Requirements.

Authors:  Boris Pastorino; Xavier de Lamballerie; Rémi Charrel
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2017-05-31

5.  Prioritizing studies of COVID-19 and lessons learned.

Authors:  Dushyantha Jayaweera; Patrick A Flume; Nora G Singer; Myron S Cohen; Anne M Lachiewicz; Amanda Cameron; Naresh Kumar; Joel Thompson; Alyssa Cabrera; Denise Daudelin; Reza Shaker; Philippe R Bauer
Journal:  J Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2021-04-21
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.