Literature DB >> 32283228

Reply to: "Skin damage among health care workers managing coronavirus disease-2019".

Teresa Oranges1, Agata Janowska2, Valentina Dini2.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32283228      PMCID: PMC7146692          DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2020.04.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol        ISSN: 0190-9622            Impact factor:   11.527


× No keyword cloud information.
To the Editor: We read with interest the article “Skin damage among health care workers managing coronavirus disease-2019” written by Lan et al. The main skin problems in health care managing COVID-19 and using medical devices are the hand eczema and the skin damage affecting the nasal bridge, cheek, and forehead. Lan et al reported that the health care workers who wore medical devices for more than 6 hours showed higher risks of skin damage, with desquamation in more than 60% of cases, and other signs, such as erythema, maceration, and ulcers, in a smaller percentage of cases. This skin damage may cause itching and pain and further impair the quality of life among health care workers. The World Health Organization recommends performing correct hand hygiene with alcohol-based hand rub (preferred in case of not visibly soiled hands) or water and soap, in particular, before touching a patient, before any clean or aseptic procedure, after exposure to body fluid, after touching a patient, and after touching a patient's surroundings. The frequent hand hygiene, the use of antiseptics, and wearing of double-layers of gloves for a long time may cause the hand eczema. At the sites of application of masks, goggles, and facial shield, pressure injuries may develop, from grade 1 (nonblanchable erythema) to grade 2/3 (erosion or ulceration). The medical device–related pressure injuries may occur on any anatomic location where the medical device is in contact with the skin and particularly where the skin is over bony prominences, such as the forehead, the nasal bridge, and the zygomatic arch. The University of Pisa (Italy) Wound Healing Unit proposes the topical management of the skin areas at risk of pressure injuries in terms of cleansing, prevention, and treatment (Table I ).
Table I

Topical management of pressure injuries in the health care worker using medical devices (masks, goggles and facial shield)

Pressure injuriesTopical management
Cleansing (grade 2/3)Saline solutionPolyhexamethylene biguanide (PHMB)
Prevention

Before wearing medical devices

Barrier film spray
Prevention

After medical devices removal

Omental lipids cream/emulsionNonadherent dressings (soft silicone/paraffin)
Grade 1Barrier film (spray/sheet)Nonadherent dressings (soft silicone/paraffin)
Grade 2/3Extra-thin hydrocolloidThin polyurethane silicone foam
Scar/hyperpigmentation preventionSilicone cream/sheetPhotoprotection SPF 50+ (cream/spray/emulsion)

SPF, Sun protection factor.

Apply after removing medical devices.

Topical management of pressure injuries in the health care worker using medical devices (masks, goggles and facial shield) Before wearing medical devices After medical devices removal SPF, Sun protection factor. Apply after removing medical devices. The no-sting barrier film spray has shown good efficacy in the management of the skin surrounding chronic wounds, with a significant reduction of the transepidermal water loss values. We suggest the use of this product before wearing the medical devices, because the alcohol-free liquid dries quickly after skin application and forms a protective, transparent, and conformable long-lasting barrier film. The use of topical products containing purified omental lipids will help in improving skin barrier function, repairing the epithelial cell membrane, and increasing microcirculation. These products are also useful to prevent the development of pressure injuries and may be used after removing the medical devices as well the nonadherent dressings (soft silicone/paraffin). Some authors described the use of thin hydrocolloid dressing to prevent pressure injuries on the nasal bridge in case of acute noninvasive ventilation. Nonadherent dressings (soft silicone/paraffin) and extra-thin hydrocolloid may theoretically also be used before the medical devices are worn, but further studies are needed to certify that these advanced dressings do not alter the safety of the devices.
  4 in total

1.  Instrumental evaluation of the protective effects of a barrier film on surrounding skin in chronic wounds.

Authors:  Valentina Dini; Francesca Salibra; Cinzia Brilli; Marco Romanelli
Journal:  Wounds       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 1.546

Review 2.  Topical purified omental lipid formulations in the prevention of skin ulcers: a narrative review.

Authors:  Marco Romanelli; Valentina Dini; Massimo Milani
Journal:  J Wound Care       Date:  2019-05-02       Impact factor: 2.072

3.  The Preventative Effect of Hydrocolloid Dressings on Nasal Bridge Pressure Ulceration in Acute Non-Invasive Ventilation.

Authors:  Abigail Bishopp; Amy Oakes; Pearlene Antoine-Pitterson; Biman Chakraborty; David Comer; Rahul Mukherjee
Journal:  Ulster Med J       Date:  2019-01-22

4.  Skin damage among health care workers managing coronavirus disease-2019.

Authors:  Jiajia Lan; Zexing Song; Xiaoping Miao; Hang Li; Yan Li; Liyun Dong; Jing Yang; Xiangjie An; Yamin Zhang; Liu Yang; Nuoya Zhou; Liu Yang; Jun Li; JingJiang Cao; Jianxiu Wang; Juan Tao
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  2020-03-18       Impact factor: 11.527

  4 in total
  6 in total

Review 1.  Adverse Effects of COVID-19 and Face Masks: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Akshitha Thatiparthi; Jeffrey Liu; Amylee Martin; Jashin J Wu
Journal:  J Clin Aesthet Dermatol       Date:  2021-09-01

2.  Prevalence and influencing factors of psychological distress among nurses in sichuan, china during the COVID-19 outbreak: A cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Caixia Xie; Jia Zhang; Jia Ping; Xinyu Li; Yu Lv; Limei Liao
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2022-08-04       Impact factor: 5.435

3.  Types and prevalence of adverse skin reactions associated with prolonged N95 and simple mask usage during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  A R Darnall; D Sall; C Bay
Journal:  J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol       Date:  2022-07-06       Impact factor: 9.228

4.  Adverse skin reactions among health care workers using face personal protective equipment during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey of six hospitals in Denmark.

Authors:  Jette G Skiveren; Malene F Ryborg; Britt Nilausen; Susan Bermark; Peter A Philipsen
Journal:  Contact Dermatitis       Date:  2021-12-27       Impact factor: 6.419

5.  Skin reactions to non-glove personal protective equipment: an emerging issue in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  M Gheisari; F Araghi; H Moravvej; M Tabary; S Dadkhahfar
Journal:  J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol       Date:  2020-06-17       Impact factor: 9.228

6.  Cutaneous manifestations and considerations in COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review.

Authors:  Farnoosh Seirafianpour; Sogand Sodagar; Arash Pour Mohammad; Parsa Panahi; Samaneh Mozafarpoor; Simin Almasi; Azadeh Goodarzi
Journal:  Dermatol Ther       Date:  2020-08-06       Impact factor: 3.858

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.