Personal Protective Equipment

Fewer than one-fifth of ambulatory-care nurses surveyed in a recent study reported compliance with all nine components of Standard Precautions, indicating a continuing need for identifying barriers to compliance and emphasizing patient and healthcare personnel safety.  As Powers, et al. (2016) emphasize, "Exposure to blood and bodily fluids represents a significant occupational risk for nurses. The most effective means of preventing bloodborne pathogen transmission is through adherence to Standard Precautions (SP). Despite published guidelines on infection control and negative health consequences of noncompliance, significant issues remain around compliance with SP to protect nurses from bloodborne infectious diseases, including hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus (HCV), and HIV."

Healthcare institutions face the question of whether to use disposable or reusable medical devices. Although in certain situations one category is clearly a better choice than the other, choosing between disposable products and reusable devices is more frequently a difficult and unclear decision. Both devices are characterized by compelling pros and cons that may force healthcare facilities into a complex and multi-faceted decision-making process.

Q: Are we allowed to use latex gloves in the decontamination area?  Is there any documentation in AAMI or OSHA that dictates the use of latex gloves in the decontamination area? Secondly, are we allowed to wear gloves in the sterile prep area while putting together trays?A:  According to the Occupational Safety & Health Administrations’ Blood Borne Pathogen Ruling (2001), “Personal protective equipment (i) Provision. When there is occupational exposure, the employer shall provide, at no cost to the employee, appropriate personal protective equipment such as, but not limited to, gloves, gowns, laboratory coats, face shields or masks and eye protection, and mouthpieces, resuscitation bags, pocket masks, or other ventilation devices. Personal protective equipment will be considered “appropriate” only if it does not permit blood or other potentially infectious materials to pass through or reach the employee’s work clothes, street clothes, undergarments, skin, eyes, mouth, or other mucous membranes under normal conditions of use and for the duration of time that the protective equipment will be used. Accessibility. The employer shall ensure that appropriate personal protective equipment in the appropriate sizes is readily accessible at the work site or is issued to employees. Hypoallergenic gloves, glove liners, powderless gloves, or other similar alternatives shall be readily accessible to those employees who are allergic to the gloves normally provided.”

The use of disposable gloves is integral to modern healthcare. Providing a protective barrier between patients and healthcare personnel, medical gloves discourage transmission of a wide variety of diseases. Currently, several types of examination and surgical gloves are available, falling into two main categories: traditional gloves manufactured with materials that provide optimal functionality but may cause health complications, or gloves that are made with newer materials and technologies but may have deficits in shelf life, strength and elasticity.

U.S. hospitals recorded nearly 58,000 work-related injuries and illnesses in 2013, amounting to 6.4 work-related injuries and illnesses for every 100 full-time employees -- almost twice as high as the overall rate for private industry. In June, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced it was targeting some of the most common causes of workplace injury and illness in the healthcare industry, and is expanding its use of enforcement resources in hospitals and nursing homes to focus on patient or resident handling; bloodborne pathogens; workplace violence; tuberculosis, and slips, trips and falls.

Johns Hopkins University and DuPont have signed license and collaboration agreements allowing DuPont to commercialize a garment with innovative features from Johns Hopkins to help protect people on the front lines of the Ebola crisis and future deadly infectious disease outbreaks. DuPont intends to have the first of these garments available in the marketplace during the first half of 2016.

Infection Control Today invited manufacturers of personal protective equipment (PPE) and antimicrobial textiles to share their perspectives on key issues relating to pandemic preparedness as well as proper donning and doffing techniques.

NIOSH and the National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory (NPPTL) announce the release of three documents related to respiratory protection in healthcare.

If you’re allergic to natural rubber latex, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has good news for you: in the future, you are less likely to be misinformed about the absence of this allergen in such products as medical devices. To avoid false assurances about this hazard, the FDA is recommending to manufacturers to stop using the labels “latex free” or “does not contain latex.” The reason for this recommendation is that the agency is not aware of any tests that can show a product contains no natural rubber latex proteins that can cause allergic reactions

Ebola virus disease presents a unique occupational health challenge to healthcare institutions, and Ebola readiness and response can drain al-ready-scarce infection prevention resources. This is reflected in a recent survey of infection preventionists at U.S. hospitals conducted by the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC) in which only 6 percent of healthcare institutions are well-prepared to receive a patient with the Ebola virus. Infection preventionists everywhere are hoping that the Ebola crisis can shed new light on the importance of a properly funded and resourced department.