Factors associated with correction of personal protective equipment nonadherence in a multidisciplinary emergency department setting: A retrospective video review

被引:0
|
作者
Kim, Mary S. [1 ]
Sarcevic, Aleksandra [2 ]
Sippel, Genevieve J. [1 ]
Mccarthy, Kathleen H. [1 ]
Wood, Eleanor A. [3 ]
Riley, Carmen [2 ]
Mun, Aaron H. [1 ]
O'Connell, Karen J. [4 ]
Lapuma, Peter T. [5 ]
Burd, Randall S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Childrens Natl Hosp, Div Trauma & Burn Surg, 111 Michigan Ave NW, Washington, DC 20010 USA
[2] Drexel Univ, Coll Comp & Informat, Philadelphia, PA USA
[3] Drexel Univ Hlth Sci Bldg, Coll Med, Philadelphia, PA USA
[4] Childrens Natl Hosp, Div Emergency Med, Washington, DC USA
[5] George Washington Univ, Milken Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Environm & Occupat Hlth, Washington, DC USA
关键词
Infection control; Infection transmission; Public health; Emergency care; Practice guidelines; COVID-19; IMPROVEMENT; INFECTION;
D O I
10.1016/j.ajic.2024.08.001
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background: Despite local and national recommendations, health care provider adherence to personal protective equipment (PPE) varied during the COVID-19 pandemic. Previous studies have identified factors influencing initial PPE adherence but did not address factors influencing behaviors leading to correction after initial nonadherence. Methods: We conducted a retrospective video review of 18 pediatric resuscitations involving aerosol-generating procedures from March 2020 to December 2022 to identify factors associated with nonadherence correction. We quantified adherent and nonadherent providers, instances of PPE nonadherence, and time to correction. We also analyzed correction behaviors, including provider actions and correction locations. Results: Among 434 providers, 362 (83%) were nonadherent with at least 1 PPE. Only 186 of 1,832 instances of nonadherence were corrected, primarily upon room entry and during patient care. Correction time varied by PPE type and nonadherence level (incomplete vs absent). Most corrections were self-initiated, with few reminders from other providers. Discussion: Potential barriers to correction include a lack of social pressure and external reminders. Solutions include optimizing PPE availability, providing real-time feedback, and educating on double gloving. Conclusions: Most providers were nonadherent to PPE requirements during high-risk infection transmission events. The low correction rate suggests challenges in promoting collective responsibility and maintaining protective behaviors during medical emergencies. (c) 2024 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.
引用
收藏
页码:30 / 35
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH INFLUENZA IN AN EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT SETTING
    Pedersen, Courtney J.
    Quinn, James, V
    Rogan, Daniel T.
    Yang, Samuel
    JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2019, 56 (05): : 478 - 483
  • [2] Determinants of fatigue in emergency department clinicians who wear personal protective equipment
    Bodnar, Daniel
    Brown, Nathan J.
    Mitchell, Gary
    Hughes, James A.
    Lourensen, Darren
    Hawkins, Tracey
    Chu, Kevin
    EMERGENCY MEDICINE AUSTRALASIA, 2024, 36 (01) : 39 - 46
  • [3] Viral load and outcome in sars infection: The role of personal protective equipment in the emergency department
    Lu, YT
    Chen, PJ
    Sheu, CY
    Liu, CL
    JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2006, 30 (01): : 7 - 15
  • [4] Emergency department staff can effectively resuscitate in level C personal protective equipment
    Udayasiri, Ruwangi
    Knott, Jonathan
    Taylor, David McD
    Papson, Jonathan
    Leow, Fiona
    Hassan, Fariza A.
    EMERGENCY MEDICINE AUSTRALASIA, 2007, 19 (02) : 113 - 121
  • [5] The effect of using personal protective equipment and aerosol box in the emergency department on the intubation times
    Ramadan, H.
    Altintas, E.
    NIGERIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2023, 26 (01) : 36 - 42
  • [6] Influential factors of impact of chemical, biological, radiation, and nuclear personal protective equipment on the performance of emergency airway management in the emergency medicine setting
    Wang, Chung-Cheng
    Chen, Hang-Cheng
    Lin, Wen-Ling
    Wu, Meng-Huan
    CLINICAL TOXICOLOGY, 2013, 51 (04) : 332 - 332
  • [7] Risk assessment and the use of personal protective equipment in an emergency department: Differing perspectives of emergency and infection control clinicians. A video-vignette survey
    Hor, Su-yin
    Wyer, Mary
    Barratt, Ruth
    Turnbull, Margo
    Rogers, Kris
    Murphy, Margaret
    Urwin, Rachel
    Jorm, Christine
    Gilbert, Gwendolyn L.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INFECTION CONTROL, 2024, 52 (10) : 1114 - 1121
  • [8] Factors Associated with Nonadherence to Emergency Department Referrals for Follow-up Ophthalmic Care
    Chen, Evan
    Ahluwalia, Aneesha
    Nwanyanwu, Kristen Harris
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2020, 61 (07)
  • [9] Telemedicine in the emergency department to decrease personal protective equipment use: a before-and-after study
    Candel, Bart G. J.
    Vaes, Selma M. M.
    van Bree, Egid M.
    Groenen, Sophie M. A.
    Derkx, Floor
    Mignot, Lisette A. A.
    de Groot, Bas
    EMERGENCY MEDICINE JOURNAL, 2021, 38 (03) : 224 - 228
  • [10] Factors Influencing Use of Personal Protective Equipment Among Emergency Medical Services Responders During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Retrospective Chart Review
    McCann-Pineo, Molly
    Li, Timmy
    Barbara, Paul
    Levinsky, Brian
    Berkowitz, Jonathan
    WESTERN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2022, 23 (03) : 396 - 407