
Assessment of Alternative Personal Protective Equipment by Emergency Department Personnel During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic
Author(s) -
Danielle Shavit,
Oren Feldman,
Khetam Hussein,
Michal Meir,
Asaf Miller,
Amichai Gutgold,
Ravit Idelman,
Noa Kvatinsky,
Daniel M. Cohen,
Itai Shavit
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
simulation in healthcare
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.685
H-Index - 49
eISSN - 1559-713X
pISSN - 1559-2332
DOI - 10.1097/sih.0000000000000508
Subject(s) - personal protective equipment , emergency department , medicine , interquartile range , pandemic , isolation (microbiology) , medical emergency , health care , protocol (science) , covid-19 , emergency medicine , pathology , nursing , surgery , alternative medicine , disease , infectious disease (medical specialty) , microbiology and biotechnology , economics , biology , economic growth
Shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE) for frontline healthcare workers managing the current severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic is a major, global challenge. In this pilot study, we describe a simulation-based method for evaluating the suitability and acceptability of an alternative biological isolation garment (BIG, a gown or a suit) for clinical use by emergency department (ED) personnel. Using a high-fidelity simulator, participants provided airway management according to the SARS-CoV-2 protocol. A nonvisible fluorescent marker was used as a surrogate marker of contamination. We assessed ultraviolet light visualization of the fluorescent marker after doffing and satisfaction with donning, use during simulation, and doffing. We found that after doffing, markers were not visualized on any of the participants and that the median satisfaction scores of the alternative and standard BIG (sBIG) were 4 [interquartile range (IQR) = 1-5] and 4 (IQR = 2-4), respectively. The results suggest the suitability and acceptability of the alternative BIG (aBIG) for use by ED personnel.