Experimental investigation of the effects of personal protective equipment on thermal comfort in hot environments

Prevention of skin damages related to personal protective equipment among healthcare workers: Summary of best-evidence practiced strategies

AIM

To conduct a quality evaluation of the literature for the prevention of skin damage caused by personal protective equipment among healthcare workers and to summarise the best-evidence practice strategies to prevent it.

DESIGN

Review.

METHODS

Two researchers retrieved the literature from Web of Science, Public Medicine, etc., from the establishment of the database until 24 June 2022. Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation II was used to assess the methodological quality of the guidelines. Expert consensus was assessed by the 2016 version of the Australian Joanna Briggs Institute Evidence-based Health Care Center corresponding evaluation standards. By tracking the original study, the quality of practice recommendations and best-practice evidence information sheets were evaluated by the 2016 version of the Australian Joanna Briggs Institute Evidence-based Health Care Center corresponding evaluation standards. The classification of evidence and recommendation level adopted the 2014 version of the Australian Joanna Briggs Institute evidence pre-grading and recommending level system.

RESULTS

A total of 5476 studies were retrieved after duplications were eliminated. After the quality evaluation, 10 qualified studies were finally included. All consisted of two guidelines, one best practice information sheet, five practice recommendations, and one expert consensus. The evaluation results of the guidelines were both B-level recommendations. The consistency strength of expert consensus was moderate (Cohen's kappa coefficient = .571). Thirty best-evidence practised strategies were compiled for four elements, including cleaning, moisturising, prophylactic dressings and others.

CONCLUSION

Our study evaluated the quality of the included studies and summarised the preventive measures of PPE-related skin lesions according to the recommendation level. The main preventive measures were divided into 4 parts and 30 items. However, the associated literature was rare, and the quality was slightly low. More high-quality research is needed to focus on healthcare workers' health and not just skin in the future.

Human thermal physiological response of wearing personal protective equipment: An educational building semi-open space experimental investigation

With the outbreak and spread of the COVID-19 epidemic, HCWs are frequently required to wear personal protective equipment (PPE) for nucleic acid sample collection in semi-open transition spaces. Wearing PPE causes significant psychological and physical stress in HCWs. In this study, operative temperature (T_op) and wet-bulb globe temperature (WBGT) were used to assess thermal conditions through field experiments, while multiple physiological parameters were measured in the subjects. The results indicated that the subjects showed statistically significant differences in thermal perception and physiological parameters with and without PPE. Using observed increases in heart rate (HR), auditory canal temperature (T_ac), mean skin temperature (MST), and end-tidal CO₂ pressure, subjects were shown to have an increased metabolic rate and heat storage while wearing PPE. Additionally, a decrease in oxygen concentration was also observed, and this decrease may be linked to fatigue and cognitive impairment. Moreover, HR, MST, and T_ac showed a significant linear relationship, which increased with temperature and operative temperature, and the HR response was stronger with PPE than without PPE. The neutral, preferred, and acceptable temperatures were significantly lower with PPE than without PPE, and the deviations for neutral T_op/WBGT were 9.5/7.1 °C and preferred T_op/WBGT was 2.2/4.0 °C, respectively. Moreover, the upper limits of acceptable WBGT, 29.4 °C with PPE and 20.4 °C without PPE, differed significantly between the two phases. Furthermore, the recorded physiological parameter responses and thermal perception responses of the subjects while wearing PPE indicated that they were at risk of thermal stress. Overall, these results suggest that people who wear PPE should focus on their health and thermal stress. This study provides a reference for the development of strategies to counteract heat stress and improve thermal comfort.

Effect of the cooling clothing integrating with phase change material on the thermal comfort of healthcare workers with personal protective equipment during the COVID-19

Wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) is essential to protect healthcare workers during the COVID-19, but the traditional cooling methods do not meet the requirements of epidemic prevention during the COVID-19. Therefore, the cooling clothing integrated with phase change material (PCM-CC) was proposed for healthcare workers performing nucleic acid sample collection outdoors. Human experiments and subjective questionnaires were used to test the effect of wearing PCM-CC on the thermal sensations of healthcare workers and to analyze the effectiveness of PCM-CC in relieving thermal stress and thereby, improving the thermal comfort of healthcare workers. Results showed that wearing PCM-CC was effective in alleviating various heat symptoms associated with wearing PPE in a hot-temperature environment. Wearing PCM-CC reduced head and facial discomfort by 25% and 41% under the 26 °C thermal environment, while it improved the mean thermal sensation vote (TSV) values by 0.71 and 1.85 under the 26 °C and 32 °C thermal environments, respectively, and made the mean TSV value close to the neutral value. Meanwhile, wearing PCM-CC reduced mean skin temperatures by 0.65 °C, and the pronounced cooling effect was found in the chest. Wearing PCM-CC could be an effective thermoregulation measure to refine the thermal comfort of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Comparison of adaptive thermal comfort with face masks in library building in Guangzhou, China

During the COVID-19 pandemic, wearing masks in public spaces has become a protective strategy. Field tests and questionnaire surveys were carried out at a university library in Guangzhou, China, during June 2021 and January 2022. The indoor environmental parameters were observed, thermal sensation votes of students on various environmental parameters were collected, symptoms of students wearing masks were quantified, and the appropriate amount of time to wear masks was established. To identify acceptable and comfortable temperature ranges, the relationship between thermal sensation and thermal index was investigated. During summer and winter, people wearing masks are symptomatic for a certain duration. The most frequently voted symptom was facial heat (62.7 % and 54.6 % during summer and winter, respectively), followed by dyspnea. During summer, more than 80 % of the participants subjects were uncomfortable and showed some symptoms after wearing masks for more than 2 h (3 h during winter). In the summer air conditioning environment in Guangzhou, the neutral T_op was 26.4 °C, and the comfortable T_op range was 25.1–27.7 °C. Under the natural ventilation environment in winter, the neutral T_op was 20.5 °C, and the comfortable T_op range was 18.5–22.5 °C. This study may provide guidance for indoor office work and learning to wear masks in Guangzhou.

Thermophysiological and Perceptual Responses of Amateur Healthcare Workers: Impacts of Ambient Condition, Inner-Garment Insulation and Personal Cooling Strategy

While personal protective equipment (PPE) protects healthcare workers from viruses, it also increases the risk of heat stress. In this study, the effects of environmental heat stress, the insulation of the PPE inner-garment layer, and the personal cooling strategy on the physiological and perceptual responses of PPE-clad young college students were evaluated. Three levels of wet bulb globe temperatures (WBGT = 15 °C, 28 °C, and 32 °C) and two types of inner garments (0.37 clo and 0.75 clo) were chosen for this study. In an uncompensable heat stress environment (WBGT = 32 °C), the effects of two commercially available personal cooling systems, including a ventilation cooling system (VCS) and an ice pack cooling system (ICS) on the heat strain mitigation of PPE-clad participants were also assessed. At WBGT = 15 °C with 0.75 clo inner garments, mean skin temperatures were stabilized at 31.2 °C, H_skin was 60-65%, and HR was about 75.5 bpm, indicating that the working scenario was on the cooler side. At WBGT = 28 °C, T_skin plateaued at approximately 34.7 °C, and the participants reported "hot" thermal sensations. The insulation reduction in inner garments from 0.75 clo to 0.37 clo did not significantly improve the physiological thermal comfort of the participants. At WBGT = 32 °C, T_skin was maintained at 35.2-35.7 °C, H_skin was nearly 90% RH, T_core exceeded 37.1 °C, and the mean HR was 91.9 bpm. These conditions indicated that such a working scenario was uncompensable, and personal cooling to mitigate heat stress was required. Relative to that in NCS (no cooling), the mean skin temperatures in ICS and VCS were reduced by 0.61 °C and 0.22 °C, respectively, and the heart rates were decreased by 10.7 and 8.5 bpm, respectively. Perceptual responses in ICS and VCS improved significantly throughout the entire field trials, with VCS outperforming ICS in the individual cooling effect.