Literature DB >> 26944010

More PPE protects better against Ebola.

Jos H Verbeek1, Raluca Cecilia Mihalache2.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26944010      PMCID: PMC7135836          DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2015.12.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Infect Control        ISSN: 0196-6553            Impact factor:   2.918


× No keyword cloud information.
To the Editor: We read the article by Dunn et al on Ebola infection among health care staff in Sierra Leone with great interest. Health care staff is at a much greater risk of Ebola infection than the population in general. It is unclear how they can be best protected against these risks. Dunn et al provide valuable information on how well personal protective equipment (PPE) works, but they have not quantified this effect. Even though they present their findings as a case study, they can also be analyzed as a retrospective cohort study of how well various levels of PPE use protect against infection in health care workers. The cohort is formed by 64 health care workers who were, ≥1 times, exposed to patients infected with Ebola. They can be divided according to their level of PPE use in no PPE use, gloves only, at least gloves and gowns, or more. Because we know if they became infected or not, we can calculate the relative risks and their 95% confidence intervals (Table 1 ). We took the total number of exposures as the denominator in calculating the risks as an equivalent of person time. We added 0.5 to prevent cells with zero cases.
Table 1

Relative risk of infection with Ebola for health care staff while wearing at least gloves and gowns, at least gloves, or gloves only compared with no PPE and for wearing at least gloves and gowns compared with no PPE or gloves only (N = 64)

Type of PPE usedNo. infectedExposure person-episodesRR and (95% confidence interval)
At least gloves and gown0.529
No PPE350.03 (0.00-0.57)
At least gloves471
No PPE350.09 (0.02-0.42)
At least gloves and gown0.529
No PPE or gloves only7470.12 (0.01-2.04)
Gloves only442
No PPE350.16 (0.04-0.71)

PPE, personal protective equipment; RR, relative risk.

Relative risk of infection with Ebola for health care staff while wearing at least gloves and gowns, at least gloves, or gloves only compared with no PPE and for wearing at least gloves and gowns compared with no PPE or gloves only (N = 64) PPE, personal protective equipment; RR, relative risk. As can be seen in Table 1, little PPE, such as gloves only, already protects considerably, but more PPE protects better. This was shown in a similar way during the severe acute respiratory syndrome epidemic. This is an important message for educating and training health care staff that have to work in circumstances where full-body PPE may not always be available.
  5 in total

Review 1.  Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses.

Authors:  Tom Jefferson; Chris B Del Mar; Liz Dooley; Eliana Ferroni; Lubna A Al-Ansary; Ghada A Bawazeer; Mieke L van Driel; Sreekumaran Nair; Mark A Jones; Sarah Thorning; John M Conly
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2011-07-06

2.  Ebola infection control in Sierra Leonean health clinics: A large cross-agency cooperative project.

Authors:  Benjamin Levy; Carol Y Rao; Laura Miller; Ngozi Kennedy; Monica Adams; Rosemary Davis; Laura Hastings; Augustin Kabano; Sarah D Bennett; Momodu Sesay
Journal:  Am J Infect Control       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 2.918

3.  Nosocomial transmission of Ebola virus disease on pediatric and maternity wards: Bombali and Tonkolili, Sierra Leone, 2014.

Authors:  Angela C Dunn; Tiffany A Walker; John Redd; David Sugerman; Jevon McFadden; Tushar Singh; Joseph Jasperse; Brima Osaio Kamara; Tom Sesay; James McAuley; Peter H Kilmarx
Journal:  Am J Infect Control       Date:  2015-10-30       Impact factor: 2.918

4.  Ebola virus disease in health care workers--Sierra Leone, 2014.

Authors:  Peter H Kilmarx; Kevin R Clarke; Patricia M Dietz; Mary J Hamel; Farah Husain; Jevon D McFadden; Benjamin J Park; David E Sugerman; Joseph S Bresee; Jonathan Mermin; James McAuley; Amara Jambai
Journal:  MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep       Date:  2014-12-12       Impact factor: 17.586

Review 5.  Effectiveness of Personal Protective Equipment for Healthcare Workers Caring for Patients with Filovirus Disease: A Rapid Review.

Authors:  Mona Hersi; Adrienne Stevens; Pauline Quach; Candyce Hamel; Kednapa Thavorn; Chantelle Garritty; Becky Skidmore; Constanza Vallenas; Susan L Norris; Matthias Egger; Sergey Eremin; Mauricio Ferri; Nahoko Shindo; David Moher
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-09       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total
  4 in total

1.  Paper-based plasma sanitizers.

Authors:  Jingjin Xie; Qiang Chen; Poornima Suresh; Subrata Roy; James F White; Aaron D Mazzeo
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Personal protective equipment for preventing highly infectious diseases due to exposure to contaminated body fluids in healthcare staff.

Authors:  Jos H Verbeek; Blair Rajamaki; Sharea Ijaz; Christina Tikka; Jani H Ruotsalainen; Michael B Edmond; Riitta Sauni; F Selcen Kilinc Balci
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-07-01

3.  Personal protective equipment for preventing highly infectious diseases due to exposure to contaminated body fluids in healthcare staff.

Authors:  Jos H Verbeek; Blair Rajamaki; Sharea Ijaz; Riitta Sauni; Elaine Toomey; Bronagh Blackwood; Christina Tikka; Jani H Ruotsalainen; F Selcen Kilinc Balci
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-05-15

4.  Personal protective equipment for preventing highly infectious diseases due to exposure to contaminated body fluids in healthcare staff.

Authors:  Jos H Verbeek; Blair Rajamaki; Sharea Ijaz; Riitta Sauni; Elaine Toomey; Bronagh Blackwood; Christina Tikka; Jani H Ruotsalainen; F Selcen Kilinc Balci
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-04-15
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.