A narrative review of personal protective equipment gowns: lessons from COVID-19.

IF 9.1 1区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Nikolaos Angelopoulos, Jo Staines, Meriel Chamberlin, Samantha Bates, Forbes McGain
{"title":"A narrative review of personal protective equipment gowns: lessons from COVID-19.","authors":"Nikolaos Angelopoulos, Jo Staines, Meriel Chamberlin, Samantha Bates, Forbes McGain","doi":"10.1016/j.bja.2024.09.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This narrative review evaluates the evidence regarding the protection offered by isolation gowns, approaches to imparting antimicrobial activity to gowns, and the environmental impacts of gown use, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted a search of the Medline, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases for articles published between January 1, 2019 to February 20, 2024. We found that current standards pertaining to isolation gowns might be irrelevant to the protection of healthcare workers from pathogen transmission, as they focus primarily on fluid barrier resistance values that are not reflective of all transmission conditions in hospitals. Although most available isolation gowns are disposable, reusable gowns could offer greater barrier protection and are more environmentally sustainable. Several techniques have been studied for their ability to impart antimicrobial properties to isolation gowns, extending their lifespan and reducing environmental impacts. However, evidence of the effectiveness of such techniques in clinical settings is scarce. We advocate for standardised guidelines inclusive of common pathogen survival tests, comfort, and durability, which reflect the actual infection risks encountered by healthcare workers, to improve the safety and efficacy of isolation gowns in hospital settings. Further research into the clinical effectiveness of antimicrobial gowns and their long-term implications on the environment is also warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":9250,"journal":{"name":"British journal of anaesthesia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2024.09.014","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This narrative review evaluates the evidence regarding the protection offered by isolation gowns, approaches to imparting antimicrobial activity to gowns, and the environmental impacts of gown use, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted a search of the Medline, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases for articles published between January 1, 2019 to February 20, 2024. We found that current standards pertaining to isolation gowns might be irrelevant to the protection of healthcare workers from pathogen transmission, as they focus primarily on fluid barrier resistance values that are not reflective of all transmission conditions in hospitals. Although most available isolation gowns are disposable, reusable gowns could offer greater barrier protection and are more environmentally sustainable. Several techniques have been studied for their ability to impart antimicrobial properties to isolation gowns, extending their lifespan and reducing environmental impacts. However, evidence of the effectiveness of such techniques in clinical settings is scarce. We advocate for standardised guidelines inclusive of common pathogen survival tests, comfort, and durability, which reflect the actual infection risks encountered by healthcare workers, to improve the safety and efficacy of isolation gowns in hospital settings. Further research into the clinical effectiveness of antimicrobial gowns and their long-term implications on the environment is also warranted.

个人防护装备防护服回顾:COVID-19 的经验教训。
这篇叙述性综述评估了有关隔离衣提供的保护、在隔离衣中添加抗菌活性的方法以及隔离衣使用对环境的影响(尤其是在 COVID-19 大流行期间)的证据。我们在 Medline、PubMed 和 Google Scholar 数据库中检索了 2019 年 1 月 1 日至 2024 年 2 月 20 日期间发表的文章。我们发现,目前与隔离衣相关的标准可能与保护医护人员免受病原体传播无关,因为这些标准主要关注的是液体屏障阻力值,并不能反映医院中的所有传播条件。虽然现有的隔离衣大多是一次性的,但可重复使用的隔离衣可以提供更强的屏障保护,而且在环境上更具可持续性。目前已研究出几种技术,可为隔离衣赋予抗菌特性,延长其使用寿命并减少对环境的影响。然而,有关这些技术在临床环境中有效性的证据却很少。我们主张制定包括常见病原体存活测试、舒适度和耐用性在内的标准化指南,以反映医护人员遇到的实际感染风险,从而提高隔离衣在医院环境中的安全性和有效性。此外,还需要进一步研究抗菌隔离衣的临床效果及其对环境的长期影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
488
审稿时长
27 days
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Anaesthesia (BJA) is a prestigious publication that covers a wide range of topics in anaesthesia, critical care medicine, pain medicine, and perioperative medicine. It aims to disseminate high-impact original research, spanning fundamental, translational, and clinical sciences, as well as clinical practice, technology, education, and training. Additionally, the journal features review articles, notable case reports, correspondence, and special articles that appeal to a broader audience. The BJA is proudly associated with The Royal College of Anaesthetists, The College of Anaesthesiologists of Ireland, and The Hong Kong College of Anaesthesiologists. This partnership provides members of these esteemed institutions with access to not only the BJA but also its sister publication, BJA Education. It is essential to note that both journals maintain their editorial independence. Overall, the BJA offers a diverse and comprehensive platform for anaesthetists, critical care physicians, pain specialists, and perioperative medicine practitioners to contribute and stay updated with the latest advancements in their respective fields.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信