Access to personal protective equipment in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom: results from a nationwide cohort study (UK-REACH).
Access to personal protective equipment in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom: results from a nationwide cohort study (UK-REACH).
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12913-022-08202-z
复制
发表时间：
2022-07-05
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Pareek, Manish
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Martin, Christopher A.;Pan, Daniel;Nazareth, Joshua;Aujayeb, Avinash;Bryant, Luke;Carr, Sue;Gray, Laura J.;Gregary, Bindu;Gupta, Amit;Guyatt, Anna L.;Gopal, Alan;Hine, Thomas;John, Catherine;McManus, I. Chris;Melbourne, Carl;Nellums, Laura B.;Reza, Rubina;Simpson, Sandra;Tobin, Martin D.;Woolf, Katherine;Zingwe, Stephen;Khunti, Kamlesh;Pareek, Manish
医护人员（HCW）是SARS-CoV-2感染的高危人群。有效使用个人防护设备（PPE）可以降低这种风险。我们试图确定在COVID-19大流行期间，英国医护人员自我报告获得适当PPE（aPPE）的流行率和预测因素。我们使用2020年12月至2021年2月期间进行的全国范围内基于队列研究的数据进行了横断面分析。结果是在两个时间点对自我报告的aPPE（所有时间访问vs大部分时间访问或访问频率较低）进行二进制测量：2020年3月英国首次全国封锁（主要分析）和问卷回复时（次要分析）。主要分析中纳入了10，508名HCW，次要分析中纳入了12，252名HCW。在主要分析中，35.2%的HCW始终报告aPPE;在次要分析中，83.9%的HCW始终报告aPPE。在主要分析中，调整后（年龄，性别，种族，移民状况，职业，气溶胶发生程序暴露，工作部门和地区，工作时间，夜班频率和对雇用组织的信任），老年HCW和在重症监护室工作的人更有可能在任何时候报告aPPE。亚裔HCW（aOR：0.77，95%CI 0.67-0.89 [vs白色]）、专职医疗卫生人员和牙科医生（vs医疗人员）以及与未观察到COVID-19患者的患者相比，观察到更多COVID-19患者的患者（≥ 21例患者/周0.74，0.61-0.90）在任何时候报告aPPE的可能性都较低。那些信任他们的雇佣组织来处理不安全的临床实践问题的人，与那些不信任的人相比，在任何时候报告aPPE的可能性都是他们的两倍。在次要分析中，重要的预测因素基本不变。在英国，只有三分之一的医务工作者在第一次封锁期间一直报告aPPE，并且aPPE在大流行后期有所改善。我们还确定了英国首次封锁期间aPPE的关键决定因素，这些因素自封锁放松以来大多持续存在。这些发现对大流行期间安全提供医疗保健具有重要意义。 在线版本包含补充材料，可通过10.1186/s12913-022-08202-z获得。
Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Effective use of personal protective equipment (PPE) reduces this risk. We sought to determine the prevalence and predictors of self-reported access to appropriate PPE (aPPE) for HCWs in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted cross sectional analyses using data from a nationwide questionnaire-based cohort study administered between December 2020-February 2021. The outcome was a binary measure of self-reported aPPE (access all of the time vs access most of the time or less frequently) at two timepoints: the first national lockdown in the UK in March 2020 (primary analysis) and at the time of questionnaire response (secondary analysis). Ten thousand five hundred eight HCWs were included in the primary analysis, and 12,252 in the secondary analysis. 35.2% of HCWs reported aPPE at all times in the primary analysis; 83.9% reported aPPE at all times in the secondary analysis. In the primary analysis, after adjustment (for age, sex, ethnicity, migration status, occupation, aerosol generating procedure exposure, work sector and region, working hours, night shift frequency and trust in employing organisation), older HCWs and those working in Intensive Care Units were more likely to report aPPE at all times. Asian HCWs (aOR:0.77, 95%CI 0.67–0.89 [vs White]), those in allied health professional and dental roles (vs those in medical roles), and those who saw a higher number of COVID-19 patients compared to those who saw none (≥ 21 patients/week 0.74, 0.61–0.90) were less likely to report aPPE at all times. Those who trusted their employing organisation to deal with concerns about unsafe clinical practice, compared to those who did not, were twice as likely to report aPPE at all times. Significant predictors were largely unchanged in the secondary analysis. Only a third of HCWs in the UK reported aPPE at all times during the first lockdown and that aPPE had improved later in the pandemic. We also identified key determinants of aPPE during the first UK lockdown, which have mostly persisted since lockdown was eased. These findings have important implications for the safe delivery of healthcare during the pandemic. The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08202-z.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1016/j.lanepe.2021.100180
发表时间：
2021-10
期刊：
The Lancet regional health. Europe
影响因子：
--
作者：
Woolf K;McManus IC;Martin CA;Nellums LB;Guyatt AL;Melbourne C;Bryant L;Gogoi M;Wobi F;Al-Oraibi A;Hassan O;Gupta A;John C;Tobin MD;Carr S;Simpson S;Gregary B;Aujayeb A;Zingwe S;Reza R;Gray LJ;Khunti K;Pareek M;UK-REACH Study Collaborative Group
通讯作者：
UK-REACH Study Collaborative Group
DOI：
10.1098/rstb.2020.0268
发表时间：
2021-07-19
期刊：
Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences
影响因子：
--
作者：
Evans S;Agnew E;Vynnycky E;Stimson J;Bhattacharya A;Rooney C;Warne B;Robotham J
通讯作者：
Robotham J
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Martin, Christopher A.;Patel, Prashanth;Pareek, Manish
通讯作者：
Pareek, Manish
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Martin-Delgado J;Viteri E;Mula A;Serpa P;Pacheco G;Prada D;Campos de Andrade Lourenção D;Campos Pavan Baptista P;Ramirez G;Mira JJ
通讯作者：
Mira JJ
影响因子：
2.9
作者：
Vindrola-Padros C;Andrews L;Dowrick A;Djellouli N;Fillmore H;Bautista Gonzalez E;Javadi D;Lewis-Jackson S;Manby L;Mitchinson L;Mulcahy Symmons S;Martin S;Regenold N;Robinson H;Sumray K;Singleton G;Syversen A;Vanderslott S;Johnson G
通讯作者：
Johnson G