Knowledge and use of personal protective equipment by nursing professionals during the Covid-19 pandemic  <span class="so-article-trans-title" dir="auto"> Translated title: Conhecimento e uso de equipamentos de proteção individual por profissionais de enfermagem durante pandemia da Covid-19 </span> <span class="so-article-trans-title" dir="auto"> Translated title: Conocimiento y uso de equipo de protección individual por profesionales de enfermería durante la Pandemia de COVID-19 </span>

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

ABSTRACT Objective: To explore the knowledge and use of personal protective equipment by nursing professionals of Primary Health Care during the Covid-19 pandemic. Method: This is an exploratory study of a non-probabilistic sample developed in Basic Health Units in the city of Picos, Piauí, Brazil. Data were collected between June and August 2020, by phone call, following a semi-structured script, with responses recording and transcription. For material analysis, the software IRaMuTeQ was used for statistical textual analyses: Descending Hierarchical Classification, similarity analysis, and word cloud. Results: From the corpus of 6,873 words and 832 lexical units, three categories were created: (1) motivations and barriers for use (20.9%); (2) handling of personal protective equipment (classes 5 and 4) with 25% and 21.6%, respectively, and (3) measures to protect users and health professionals (classes 3 and 5) with 17.6% and 14.9%. Conclusion: The nursing professionals interviewed demonstrated that they did not have sufficient knowledge for the proper use of the equipment, which could compromise their integrity and that of the patient as a subject who receives unsafe care.

Translated abstract

RESUMO Objetivo: Explorar o conhecimento e o uso de equipamentos de proteção individual por profissionais de enfermagem da Atenção Básica durante pandemia da Covid-19. Método: Estudo exploratório de amostra não probabilística desenvolvido em Unidades Básicas de Saúde do município de Picos, Piauí, Brasil. Os dados foram coletados entre junho e agosto de 2020, por ligação telefônica, seguindo roteiro semiestruturado, com gravação e transcrição das respostas. Para análise do material, utilizou-se o software IRaMuTeQ para as análises textuais estatísticas: Classificação Hierárquica Descendente, análise de similitude e nuvem de palavras. Resultados: Do corpus de 6.873 palavras e 832 unidades lexicais foram constituídas três categorias: (1) motivações e barreiras para o uso (20,9%); (2) manipulação dos equipamentos de proteção individual (classes 5 e 4) com 25% e 21,6%, respectivamente, e (3) medidas para proteção de usuários e profissionais de saúde (classes 3 e 5) com 17,6% e 14,9%. Conclusão: Os profissionais de enfermagem entrevistados demonstraram não possuir conhecimento suficiente para o uso adequado dos equipamentos, o que pode comprometer sua integridade e a do paciente como sujeito que recebe o cuidado não seguro.

Translated abstract

RESUMEN Objetivo: Explotar el conocimiento y el uso de equipos de protección individual por profesionales de enfermería de la Atención Básica durante la pandemia de Covid-19. Método: Estudio exploratorio de muestreo no probabilístico desarrollado en Unidades Básicas de Salud del municipio de Picos, Piauí, Brasil. Los datos fueron recolectados entre junio y agosto de 2020, por llamadas telefónicas, siguió texto semiestructurado, con grabación y transcripción de las respuestas. Para el análisis del material, se utilizó el software IRaMuTeQ para los análisis textuales estadísticos: Clasificación Descendente Jerárquica, análisis de similitud y nube de palabras. Resultados: Del corpus de 6.873 palabras y 832 unidades lexicales fueron constituidas tres clases: (1) motivaciones y barreras para el uso (20,9%); (2) manipulación de los equipos de protección individual (clases 5 y 4) con 25% y 21,6%, respectivamente, y (3) medidas para protección de usuarios y profesionales de salud (clases 3 y 5) con 17,6% y 14,9%. Conclusión: Los profesionales de enfermería entrevistados demostraron no poseer conocimiento suficiente para el uso adecuado de los equipos, lo que puede comprometer su integridad y la del paciente como sujeto que recibe el cuidado no seguro.

Related collections

Most cited references 25

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Timely mental health care for the 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak is urgently needed

Yu-Tao Xiang, Yuan Yang, Wen. Li … (2020)

The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) pneumonia, believed to have originated in a wet market in Wuhan, Hubei province, China at the end of 2019, has gained intense attention nationwide and globally. To lower the risk of further disease transmission, the authority in Wuhan suspended public transport indefinitely from Jan 23, 2020; similar measures were adopted soon in many other cities in China. As of Jan 25, 2020, 30 Chinese provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions covering over 1·3 billion people have initiated first-level responses to major public health emergencies. A range of measures has been urgently adopted,1, 2 such as early identification and isolation of suspected and diagnosed cases, contact tracing and monitoring, collection of clinical data and biological samples from patients, dissemination of regional and national diagnostic criteria and expert treatment consensus, establishment of isolation units and hospitals, and prompt provision of medical supplies and external expert teams to Hubei province. The emergence of the 2019-nCoV pneumonia has parallels with the 2003 outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), which was caused by another coronavirus that killed 349 of 5327 patients with confirmed infection in China. 3 Although the diseases have different clinical presentations,1, 4 the infectious cause, epidemiological features, fast transmission pattern, and insufficient preparedness of health authorities to address the outbreaks are similar. So far, mental health care for the patients and health professionals directly affected by the 2019-nCoV epidemic has been under-addressed, although the National Health Commission of China released the notification of basic principles for emergency psychological crisis interventions for the 2019-nCoV pneumonia on Jan 26, 2020. 5 This notification contained a reference to mental health problems and interventions that occurred during the 2003 SARS outbreak, and mentioned that mental health care should be provided for patients with 2019-nCoV pneumonitis, close contacts, suspected cases who are isolated at home, patients in fever clinics, families and friends of affected people, health professionals caring for infected patients, and the public who are in need. To date, epidemiological data on the mental health problems and psychiatric morbidity of those suspected or diagnosed with the 2019-nCoV and their treating health professionals have not been available; therefore how best to respond to challenges during the outbreak is unknown. The observations of mental health consequences and measures taken during the 2003 SARS outbreak could help inform health authorities and the public to provide mental health interventions to those who are in need. Patients with confirmed or suspected 2019-nCoV may experience fear of the consequences of infection with a potentially fatal new virus, and those in quarantine might experience boredom, loneliness, and anger. Furthermore, symptoms of the infection, such as fever, hypoxia, and cough, as well as adverse effects of treatment, such as insomnia caused by corticosteroids, could lead to worsening anxiety and mental distress. 2019-nCoV has been repeatedly described as a killer virus, for example on WeChat, which has perpetuated the sense of danger and uncertainty among health workers and the public. In the early phase of the SARS outbreak, a range of psychiatric morbidities, including persistent depression, anxiety, panic attacks, psychomotor excitement, psychotic symptoms, delirium, and even suicidality, were reported.6, 7 Mandatory contact tracing and 14 days quarantine, which form part of the public health responses to the 2019-nCoV pneumonia outbreak, could increase patients' anxiety and guilt about the effects of contagion, quarantine, and stigma on their families and friends. Health professionals, especially those working in hospitals caring for people with confirmed or suspected 2019-nCoV pneumonia, are vulnerable to both high risk of infection and mental health problems. They may also experience fear of contagion and spreading the virus to their families, friends, or colleagues. Health workers in a Beijing hospital who were quarantined, worked in high-risk clinical settings such as SARS units, or had family or friends who were infected with SARS, had substantially more post-traumatic stress symptoms than those without these experiences. 8 Health professionals who worked in SARS units and hospitals during the SARS outbreak also reported depression, anxiety, fear, and frustration.6, 9 Despite the common mental health problems and disorders found among patients and health workers in such settings, most health professionals working in isolation units and hospitals do not receive any training in providing mental health care. Timely mental health care needs to be developed urgently. Some methods used in the SARS outbreak could be helpful for the response to the 2019-nCoV outbreak. First, multidisciplinary mental health teams established by health authorities at regional and national levels (including psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, clinical psychologists, and other mental health workers) should deliver mental health support to patients and health workers. Specialised psychiatric treatments and appropriate mental health services and facilities should be provided for patients with comorbid mental disorders. Second, clear communication with regular and accurate updates about the 2019-nCoV outbreak should be provided to both health workers and patients in order to address their sense of uncertainty and fear. Treatment plans, progress reports, and health status updates should be given to both patients and their families. Third, secure services should be set up to provide psychological counselling using electronic devices and applications (such as smartphones and WeChat) for affected patients, as well as their families and members of the public. Using safe communication channels between patients and families, such as smartphone communication and WeChat, should be encouraged to decrease isolation. Fourth, suspected and diagnosed patients with 2019-nCoV pneumonia as well as health professionals working in hospitals caring for infected patients should receive regular clinical screening for depression, anxiety, and suicidality by mental health workers. Timely psychiatric treatments should be provided for those presenting with more severe mental health problems. For most patients and health workers, emotional and behavioural responses are part of an adaptive response to extraordinary stress, and psychotherapy techniques such as those based on the stress-adaptation model might be helpful.7, 10 If psychotropic medications are used, such as those prescribed by psychiatrists for severe psychiatric comorbidities, 6 basic pharmacological treatment principles of ensuring minimum harm should be followed to reduce harmful effects of any interactions with 2019-nCoV and its treatments. In any biological disaster, themes of fear, uncertainty, and stigmatisation are common and may act as barriers to appropriate medical and mental health interventions. Based on experience from past serious novel pneumonia outbreaks globally and the psychosocial impact of viral epidemics, the development and implementation of mental health assessment, support, treatment, and services are crucial and pressing goals for the health response to the 2019-nCoV outbreak. © 2020 VW Pics/Science Photo Library 2020 Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

0 comments Cited 1524 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Reasons for healthcare workers becoming infected with novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China

J. Wang, M. Zhou, F. Liu (2020)

Sir, The outbreak of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in mainland China has been declared as a public health emergency (PHE) by the World Health Organization (WHO) [1]. Globally, until February 28th, 2020, there have been reported 83,774 confirmed cases and 2867 deaths [2]. During the periods of outbreak of COVID-19 or other infectious diseases, implementation of infection prevention and control (IPC) is of great importance in healthcare settings, especially regarding personal protection of healthcare workers [3,4]. In order to contain the outbreak of COVID-19 in mainland China, the National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China (NHCPRC) has so far dispatched medical support teams (41,600 healthcare workers from 30 provinces and municipalities) to assist with medical treatment in Wuhan and Hubei provinces [5]. A survey by the Health Commission of Guangdong Province released information on the distribution of 2431 healthcare workers in the Guangdong medical support teams [6]. Nurses (∼60%) were the predominant healthcare workers in the teams, followed by clinicians (∼30%). Half of clinicians with job titles were deputy chief physician, and 25% specialized in respiratory and critical medicine [6]. It is worth mentioning that 5.8% (140/2431) healthcare workers worked on the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome in 2003 [6]. Recently, Wu et al. have reported the problems relating to COVID-19 IPC in healthcare settings, highlighting the personal protection of healthcare workers [7]. However, at a press conference of the WHO–China Joint Mission on COVID-19, NHCPRC reported that up until February 24th 2055 healthcare workers (community/hospital-acquired not to be defined) had been confirmed infected with COVID-19, with 22 (1.1%) deaths [8]. Ninety percent of infected healthcare workers were from Hubei province, and most cases happened in late January. It is worth mentioning that the proportion of healthcare workers infected by COVID-19 (2.7%, 95% CI: 2.6–2.8) was significantly lower compared with healthcare workers infected by SARS (21.1%, 95% CI: 20.2–22.0). Therefore, the director of the National Hospital Infection Management and Quality Control Centre summarized some reasons for such a high number of infected healthcare workers during the beginning of the emergency outbreak [9]. First, inadequate personal protection of healthcare workers at the beginning of the epidemic was a central issue. In fact, they did not understand the pathogen well; and their awareness of personal protection was not strong enough. Therefore, the front-line healthcare workers did not implement the effective personal protection before conducting the treatment. Second, long-time exposure to large numbers of infected patients directly increased the risk of infection for healthcare workers. Also, pressure of treatment, work intensity, and lack of rest indirectly increased the probability of infection for healthcare workers. Third, shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE) was also a serious problem. First-level emergency responses have been initiated in various parts of the country, which has led to a rapid increase in the demand for PPE. This circumstance increased the risk of infection for healthcare workers due to lack of sufficient PPE. Fourth, the front-line healthcare workers (except infectious disease physicians) received inadequate training for IPC, leaving them with a lack of knowledge of IPC for respiratory-borne infectious diseases. After initiation of emergency responses, healthcare workers have not had enough time for systematic training and practice. Professional supervision and guidance, as well as monitoring mechanisms, were lacking. This situation further amplified the risk of infection for healthcare workers. Finally, international communities, especially in other low- and middle-income countries with potential COVID-19 outbreaks, should learn early how to protect their healthcare workers. Furthermore, the COVID-19 confirmed cases have been reported to have surged in South Korea, Japan, Italy, and Iran in the past few days [2]. The increase in awareness of personal protection, sufficient PPE, and proper preparedness and response would play an important role in lowering the risk of infection for healthcare workers. Conflict of interest statement None declared. Funding sources None.

0 comments Cited 303 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Personal protective equipment and intensive care unit healthcare worker safety in the COVID-19 era (PPE-SAFE): An international survey

Alexis Tabah, Mahesh Ramanan, Kevin B Laupland … (2020)

Purpose To survey healthcare workers (HCW) on availability and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) caring for COVID-19 patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Materials and method A web-based survey distributed worldwide in April 2020. Results We received 2711 responses from 1797 (67%) physicians, 744 (27%) nurses, and 170 (6%) Allied HCW. For routine care, most (1557, 58%) reportedly used FFP2/N95 masks, waterproof long sleeve gowns (1623; 67%), and face shields/visors (1574; 62%). Powered Air-Purifying Respirators were used routinely and for intubation only by 184 (7%) and 254 (13%) respondents, respectively. Surgical masks were used for routine care by 289 (15%) and 47 (2%) for intubations. At least one piece of standard PPE was unavailable for 1402 (52%), and 817 (30%) reported reusing single-use PPE. PPE was worn for a median of 4 h (IQR 2, 5). Adverse effects of PPE were associated with longer shift durations and included heat (1266, 51%), thirst (1174, 47%), pressure areas (1088, 44%), headaches (696, 28%), Inability to use the bathroom (661, 27%) and extreme exhaustion (492, 20%). Conclusions HCWs reported widespread shortages, frequent reuse of, and adverse effects related to PPE. Urgent action by healthcare administrators, policymakers, governments and industry is warranted.

0 comments Cited 142 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (publisher-id): reeusp

Title: Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP

Abbreviated Title: Rev. esc. enferm. USP

Publisher: Universidade de São Paulo, Escola de Enfermagem (São Paulo, SP, Brazil )

ISSN (Print): 0080-6234

ISSN (Electronic): 1980-220X

Publication date (Print and electronic): 2021

Volume: 55

Electronic Location Identifier: e20210125

Affiliations

[3] Teresina Piauí orgnameUniversidade Federal do Piauí orgdiv1Programa de Pós-graduação em Enfermagem Brazil

[1] Picos Piauí orgnameUniversidade Federal do Piauí orgdiv1Programa de Pós-graduação mestrado profissional de saúde da mulher Brazil

[4] Picos Piauí orgnameUniversidade Federal do Piauí orgdiv1Departamento de Enfermagem Brazil

[2] Teresina Piauí orgnameUniversidade Federal do Piauí orgdiv1Programa de Residência em Área Profissional da Saúde orgdiv2Departamento de Enfermagem Obstétrica Brazil

Article

Publisher ID: S0080-62342021000100573 Publisher ID: S0080-6234(21)05500000573

DOI: 10.1590/1980-220x-reeusp-2021-0125

SO-VID: 9408f9c8-9da1-4f5a-9eac-0b402a55e5d1

License:

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

History

Date accepted : 13 September 2021

Date received : 20 March 2021

Page count

Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 26, Pages: 0

Product

SciELO Revista de Enfermagem

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Cited by 1

Nursing skills required across natural and man‐made disasters: A scoping review
Authors: Ya Su, Xi Vivien Wu, Natsuka Ogawa …

See all cited by

Most referenced authors 399

See all reference authors

Read this article at

Abstract

Translated abstract

Translated abstract

Related collections

Novel Coronavirus Disease COVID-19

Most cited references 25

Timely mental health care for the 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak is urgently needed

Reasons for healthcare workers becoming infected with novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China

Personal protective equipment and intensive care unit healthcare worker safety in the COVID-19 era (PPE-SAFE): An international survey

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Article

History

Page count

Product

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 111

Cited by 1

Most referenced authors 399