The effects of metabolic work rate and ambient environment on physiological tolerance times while wearing explosive and chemical personal protective equipment

This study evaluated the physiological tolerance times when wearing explosive and chemical (>35kg) personal protective equipment (PPE) in simulated environmental extremes across a range of differing work intensities. Twelve healthy males undertook nine trials which involved walking on a treadmill at 2.5, 4 and 5.5 km.h-1 in the following environmental conditions, 21, 30 and 37 °C wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT). Participants exercised for 60 min or until volitional fatigue, core temperature reached 39 °C, or heart rate exceeded 90% of maximum. Tolerance time, core temperature, skin temperature, mean body temperature, heart rate and body mass loss were measured. Exercise time was reduced in the higher WBGT environments (WBGT37

Why don’t pesticide applicators protect themselves? Exploring the use of personal protective equipment among Colombian smallholders

The misuse of personal protective equipment (PPE) during pesticide application was investigated among smallholders in Colombia. The integrative agent-centered (IAC) framework and a logistic regression approach were adopted. The results suggest that the descriptive social norm was significantly influencing PPE use. The following were also important: (1) having experienced pesticide-related health problems; (2) age; (3) the share of pesticide application carried out; and (4) the perception of PPE hindering work. Interestingly, the influence of these factors differed for different pieces of PPE. Since conformity to the social norm is a source of rigidity in the system, behavioral change may take the form of a discontinuous transition. In conclusion, five suggestions for triggering a transition towards more sustainable PPE use are formulated: (1) diversifying targets/tools; (2) addressing structural aspects; (3) sustaining interventions in the long-term; (4) targeting farmers’ learning-by-experience; and (5) targeting PPE use on a collective level.

Exploring behavioural change through an agent-oriented system dynamics model: the use of personal protective equipment among pesticide applicators in Colombia

The misuse of Personal Protective Equipment results in health risk among smallholders in developing countries, and education is often proposed to promote safer practices. However, evidence point to limited effects of education. This paper presents a System Dynamics model which allows the identification of risk-minimizing policies for behavioural change. The model is based on the IAC framework and survey data. It represents farmers' decision-making from an agent-oriented standpoint. The most successful intervention strategy was the one which intervened in the long term, targeted key stocks in the systems and was diversified. However, the results suggest that, under these conditions, no policy is able to trigger a self sustaining behavioural change. Two implementation approaches were suggested by experts. One, based on constant social control, corresponds to a change of the current model's parameters. The other, based on participation, would lead farmers to new thinking, i.e. changes in their decision-making structure.

Design of personal protective equipment: To promote of Brazilian artefacts with ergonomic attributes

This research aims to investigate a topic sometimes overlooked among the research of ergonomics. Particularly, we treat the garments as personal protective equipment. In this study we abode on clothing produced and used in Brazil, making notes about the management of occupational safety for the use of such equipment. In turn, identify Relevant requirements for the design of personal protective equipment used in Brazil, in line with what is being studied in global forums on the subject. © 2013 Taylor & Francis Group.

Effectiveness of Personal Protective Equipment for Healthcare Workers Caring for Patients with Filovirus Disease: A Rapid Review.

BACKGROUND A rapid review, guided by a protocol, was conducted to inform development of the World Health Organization's guideline on personal protective equipment in the context of the ongoing (2013-present) Western African filovirus disease outbreak, with a focus on health care workers directly caring for patients with Ebola or Marburg virus diseases. METHODS Electronic databases and grey literature sources were searched. Eligibility criteria initially included comparative studies on Ebola and Marburg virus diseases reported in English or French, but criteria were expanded to studies on other viral hemorrhagic fevers and non-comparative designs due to the paucity of studies. After title and abstract screening (two people to exclude), full-text reports of potentially relevant articles were assessed in duplicate. Fifty-seven percent of extraction information was verified. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to inform the quality of evidence assessments. RESULTS Thirty non-comparative studies (8 related to Ebola virus disease) were located, and 27 provided data on viral transmission. Reporting of personal protective equipment components and infection prevention and control protocols was generally poor. CONCLUSIONS Insufficient evidence exists to draw conclusions regarding the comparative effectiveness of various types of personal protective equipment. Additional research is urgently needed to determine optimal PPE for health care workers caring for patients with filovirus.

Personal protective equipment.

"OSHA 3077."

Personal protective equipment /

"March 1977"

Personal protective equipment.

"Dress safe--Work safe--Be safe."

Factors surgical team members perceive influence choices of wearing or not wearing personal protective equipment during operative /invasive procedures

Exposure to certain bloodborne pathogens can prematurely end a person’s life. Healthcare workers (HCWs), especially those who are members of surgical teams, are at increased risk of exposure to these pathogens. The proper use of personal protective equipment (PPE) during operative/invasive procedures reduces that risk. Despite this, some HCWs fail to consistently use PPE as required by federal regulation, accrediting agencies, hospital policy, and professional association standards. The purpose of this mixed methods survey study was to (a) examine factors surgical team members perceive influence choices of wearing or not wearing PPE during operative/invasive procedures and (b) determine what would influence consistent use of PPE by surgical team members. Using an ex post facto, non-experimental design, the memberships of five professional associations whose members comprise surgical teams were invited to complete a mixed methods survey study. The primary research question for the study was: What differences (perceptual and demographic) exist between surgical team members that influence their choices of wearing or not wearing PPE during operative/invasive procedures? Four principal differences were found between surgical team members. Functional (i.e., profession or role based) differences exist between the groups. Age and experience (i.e., time in profession) differences exist among members of the groups. Finally, being a nurse anesthetist influences the use of risk assessment to determine the level of PPE to use. Four common themes emerged across all groups informing the two study purposes. Those themes were: availability, education, leadership, and performance. Subsidiary research questions examined the influence of previous accidental exposure to blood or body fluids, federal regulations, hospital policy and procedure, leaders’ attitudes, and patients’ needs on the use of PPE. Each of these was found to strongly influence surgical team members and their use of PPE during operative/invasive procedures. Implications based on the findings affect organizational policy, purchasing and distribution decisions, curriculum design and instruction, leader behavior, and finally partnership with PPE manufacturers. Surgical team members must balance their innate need to care for patients with their need to protect themselves. Results of this study will help team members, leaders, and educators achieve this balance.

Factors Surgical Team Members Perceive Influence Choices of Wearing or not Wearing Personal Protective Equipment During Operative/Invasive Procedures

Exposure to certain bloodborne pathogens can prematurely end a person’s life. Healthcare workers (HCWs), especially those who are members of surgical teams, are at increased risk of exposure to these pathogens. The proper use of personal protective equipment (PPE) during operative/invasive procedures reduces that risk. Despite this, some HCWs fail to consistently use PPE as required by federal regulation, accrediting agencies, hospital policy, and professional association standards. The purpose of this mixed methods survey study was to (a) examine factors surgical team members perceive influence choices of wearing or not wearing PPE during operative/invasive procedures and (b) determine what would influence consistent use of PPE by surgical team members. Using an ex post facto, non-experimental design, the memberships of five professional associations whose members comprise surgical teams were invited to complete a mixed methods survey study. The primary research question for the study was: What differences (perceptual and demographic) exist between surgical team members that influence their choices of wearing or not wearing PPE during operative/invasive procedures? Four principal differences were found between surgical team members. Functional (i.e., profession or role based) differences exist between the groups. Age and experience (i.e., time in profession) differences exist among members of the groups. Finally, being a nurse anesthetist influences the use of risk assessment to determine the level of PPE to use. Four common themes emerged across all groups informing the two study purposes. Those themes were: availability, education, leadership, and performance. Subsidiary research questions examined the influence of previous accidental exposure to blood or body fluids, federal regulations, hospital policy and procedure, leaders’ attitudes, and patients’ needs on the use of PPE. Each of these was found to strongly influence surgical team members and their use of PPE during operative/invasive procedures. Implications based on the findings affect organizational policy, purchasing and distribution decisions, curriculum design and instruction, leader behavior, and finally partnership with PPE manufacturers. Surgical team members must balance their innate need to care for patients with their need to protect themselves. Results of this study will help team members, leaders, and educators achieve this balance.

Motorcycle protective clothing : protection from injury or just the weather?

Background Apart from helmets, little is known about the effectiveness of motorcycle protective clothing in reducing injuries in crashes. The study aimed to quantify the association between usage of motorcycle clothing and injury in crashes. Methods and findings Cross-sectional analytic study. Crashed motorcyclists (n = 212, 71% of identified eligible cases) were recruited through hospitals and motorcycle repair services. Data was obtained through structured face-to-face interviews. The main outcome was hospitalization and motorcycle crash-related injury. Poisson regression was used to estimate relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals for injury adjusting for potential confounders. Results Motorcyclists were significantly less likely to be admitted to hospital if they crashed wearing motorcycle jackets (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.69–0.91), pants (RR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.25–0.94), or gloves (RR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.26–0.66). When garments included fitted body armour there was a significantly reduced risk of injury to the upper body (RR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.66–0.89), hands and wrists (RR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.38–0.81), legs (RR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.40–0.90), feet and ankles (RR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.35–0.83). Non-motorcycle boots were also associated with a reduced risk of injury compared to shoes or joggers (RR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.28–0.75). No association between use of body armour and risk of fracture injuries was detected. A substantial proportion of motorcycle designed gloves (25.7%), jackets (29.7%) and pants (28.1%) were assessed to have failed due to material damage in the crash. Conclusions Motorcycle protective clothing is associated with reduced risk and severity of crash related injury and hospitalization, particularly when fitted with body armour. The proportion of clothing items that failed under crash conditions indicates a need for improved quality control. While mandating usage of protective clothing is not recommended, consideration could be given to providing incentives for usage of protective clothing, such as tax exemptions for safety gear, health insurance premium reductions and rebates.

Inside the ‘Hurt Locker’: The combined effects of explosive ordnance disposal and chemical protective clothing on physiological tolerance time in extreme environments

Background Explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) technicians are often required to wear specialised clothing combinations that not only protect against the risk of explosion but also potential chemical contamination. This heavy (>35kg) and encapsulating ensemble is likely to increase physiological strain by increasing metabolic heat production and impairing heat dissipation. This study investigated the physiological tolerance times of two different chemical protective undergarments, commonly worn with EOD personal protective clothing, in a range of simulated environmental extremes and work intensities Methods Seven males performed eighteen trials wearing two ensembles. The trials involved walking on a treadmill at 2.5, 4 and 5.5 km.h-1 at each of the following environmental conditions, 21, 30 and 37°C wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT). The trials were ceased if the participants’ core temperature reached 39°C, if heart rate exceeded 90% of maximum, if walking time reached 60 minutes or due to volitional fatigue. Results Physiological tolerance times ranged from 8 to 60 min and the duration (mean difference: 2.78 min, P>0.05) were similar in both ensembles. A significant effect for environment (21>30>37°C WBGT, P<0.05) and work intensity (2.5>4>5.5 km.h-1, P< 0.05) was observed in tolerance time. The majority of trials across both ensembles (101/126; 80.1%) were terminated due to participants achieving a heart rate equivalent to greater than 90% of their maximum. Conclusions Physiological tolerance times wearing these two chemical protective undergarments, worn underneath EOD personal protective clothing, were similar and predominantly limited by cardiovascular strain.