American journal of infection control · 2025
Self-contamination risk and failure modes during high-level PPE doffing: A pilot comparison of 2 powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) hoods.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Erukunuakpor Kimberly, Morgan Jill, Kraft Colleen S, Grimm David, Nguyen Alexandra, Mumma Joel M, Casanova Lisa M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Personal protective equipment doffing protocols can reduce risks of pathogen self-contamination. Powered air-purifying respirators may increase these risks. This study compares viral contamination and errors during simulated doffing of single-layer versus double-layer hood powered air-purifying respirators.
METHODS: Eight participants performed 2 simulations (video recorded for failure modes [FMs] and effects analysis): 1 single-layer hood (laid over Tyvek suit) and 1 double-layer hood (top laid over and bottom tucked into suit). Hoods were contaminated with viruses. After doffing, inner gloves, face, hands, and scrubs were sampled.
RESULTS: Virus contaminated at least 1 site in 6/8 single- and 5/8 double-layer simulations. Virus-contaminated inner gloves in single- (6 participants, median 5.42 × 104 plaque-forming units) and double-layer (2 participants, median 7.23 × 102 plaque-forming units) simulations, and hands of 2 participants in single-layer simulations. Single-layer doffing had 13 FMs; double had 31.
DISCUSSION: Double-layer doffing reduced inner glove contamination. The double-layer protocol may reduce glove-face shield contact but allow more opportunities for error. Double-layer doffing errors may less frequently lead to contamination than single layer.
CONCLUSIONS: Contamination and FMs may differ between double- and single-layer doffing. Although inner glove contamination was reduced, double-layer doffing may need redesign to reduce FMs and contamination.
METHODS: Eight participants performed 2 simulations (video recorded for failure modes [FMs] and effects analysis): 1 single-layer hood (laid over Tyvek suit) and 1 double-layer hood (top laid over and bottom tucked into suit). Hoods were contaminated with viruses. After doffing, inner gloves, face, hands, and scrubs were sampled.
RESULTS: Virus contaminated at least 1 site in 6/8 single- and 5/8 double-layer simulations. Virus-contaminated inner gloves in single- (6 participants, median 5.42 × 104 plaque-forming units) and double-layer (2 participants, median 7.23 × 102 plaque-forming units) simulations, and hands of 2 participants in single-layer simulations. Single-layer doffing had 13 FMs; double had 31.
DISCUSSION: Double-layer doffing reduced inner glove contamination. The double-layer protocol may reduce glove-face shield contact but allow more opportunities for error. Double-layer doffing errors may less frequently lead to contamination than single layer.
CONCLUSIONS: Contamination and FMs may differ between double- and single-layer doffing. Although inner glove contamination was reduced, double-layer doffing may need redesign to reduce FMs and contamination.