Shifting trends in demographic features of chemical eye injuries during COVID-19 pandemic

Objectives

To evaluate the etiological cause distribution in chemical eye injuries during COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

In this retrospective case series, the medical records of patients, who presented with chemical eye injuries between March 30, 2020, and March 1, 2021, were evaluated and compared with the data covering 10 years before the pandemic.

Results

Twenty-seven eyes of twenty-three patients (19 adults, 4 children) who presented in pandemic period were included. Alcohol-based hand sanitizer was one of the two most common agents (n = 6 eyes) in the pandemic era. In the last 10 years before the pandemic, 137 eyes of 102 patients were treated for chemical eye injuries. Injuries due to alcohol-based hand sanitizer increased from 3.1 to 21.1% among all patients, and from 0 to 75% among pediatric patients during the pandemic era compared to the pre-pandemic period. The increase was statistically significant both in all patients (p = .003) and in the pediatric patient group (p = .048).

Conclusion

Due to COVID-19 pandemic, alcohol-based hand sanitizer use became more common. Consequently, the frequency of hand sanitizer related chemical injuries showed a 13-fold increase and the age group affected by such accidents is altered during the pandemic. Three out of four pediatric patients (75%) were injured with alcohol-based hand sanitizers, which draws attention to the fact that improperly placed hand sanitizer stations, being just at the eye level of children, can cause chemical eye injuries in the pediatric population even more.

Assessment of Ethanol Exposure from Hand Sanitizer Use and Potential for Developmental Toxicity in Nursing Infants

Ingestion of ethanol during pregnancy is known to have detrimental effects on the fetus. Although the potential developmental effects of maternal ethanol intake during lactation are less well characterized, public health guidelines recommend avoidance of alcohol or, if alcohol is consumed, to allow for 1–2 h to pass before nursing. A proposal to classify ethanol as potentially harmful to breast‐fed children warrants an investigation of the potential adverse neurodevelopmental effects of low‐dose ethanol exposure during lactation. There currently are no studies that have examined neurodevelopmental outcomes from lactational exposure to ethanol from the use of topical products that contain ethanol, such as alcohol‐based hand sanitizers (ABHS). Furthermore, the epidemiological literature of lactational ethanol exposures from maternal alcohol consumption is limited in design, provides equivocal evidence of neurological effects in infants, and is insufficient to characterize a dose–response relationship for developmental effects. Toxicological studies that observed neurodevelopmental effects in pups from ethanol via lactation did so at exceedingly high doses that also caused maternal toxicity. In this investigation, blood ethanol concentrations (BECs) of breastfeeding women following typical‐to‐intense ABHS use were computationally predicted and compared to health benchmarks to quantify the risk for developmental outcomes. Margins of 2.2 to 1000 exist between BECs associated with ABHS use compared to BECs associated with neurotoxicity adverse effect levels in the toxicology literature or oral ethanol intake per public health guidelines. Neurodevelopmental effects are not likely to occur in infants due to ABHS use by breastfeeding women, even when ABHSs are used at intense frequencies.

Adverse neurodevelopmental effects of ethanol exposure are supported by toxicological studies; ethanol as a potential “lactation hazard” needs evaluation. A lactation hazard may not be applicable for all ethanol‐containing products, such as hand sanitizers. Furthermore, internal dose assessments of hand sanitizer use are lacking. Computationally modeled blood ethanol concentrations following hand sanitizer use are lower than concentrations associated with toxicological and guideline benchmarks. Therefore, there is low potential for the use of ethanol‐containing hand sanitizers to be a lactation hazard.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic waves on health-care worker hand hygiene activity in department of medicine and ICU as measured by an automated monitoring system

BACKGROUND

Hand hygiene (HH) compliance among health-care workers is important for preventing transmission of infectious diseases.

AIM

To describe health-care worker hand hygiene activity in ICU and non-ICU patients' rooms, using an automated monitoring system (AMS), before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

At the Intercommunal Hospital of Créteil, near Paris, France, alcohol-based hand sanitizer (ABHS) consumption in the Department of Medicine (DM) and ICU was recorded using an AMS during four periods: before, during, and after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, and during its second wave.

FINDINGS

From 1st February to 30th November 2020, in the DM, the mean number of doses per patient-day for each of the four periods was, respectively, 5.7 (±0.3), 19.4 (±1.3), 17.6 (±0.7), and 7.9 (±0.2, P < 0.0001). In contrast, ICU ABHS consumption remained relatively constant. In the DM, during the pandemic waves, ABHS consumption was higher in rooms of COVID-19 patients than in other patients' rooms. Multivariate analysis showed ABHS consumption was associated with the period in the DM, and with the number of HCWs in the ICU.

CONCLUSION

An AMS allows real-time collection of ABHS consumption data that can be used to adapt training and prevention measures to specific hospital departments.

Evaluation of quality and antimicrobial efficacy of locally manufactured alcohol-based hand sanitizers marketed in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia in the era of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been rapidly spreading across the globe since the World Health Organization (WHO) has declared the disease outbreak as a global pandemic on March 11, 2020. Hand hygiene, via either regular handwashing with soap and water or using hand sanitizers, is among the various measures that need to be followed to control the outbreak of the disease. Alcohol-based hand sanitizers (ABHS) are the "gold standard" for hand disinfection because of their broad antimicrobial spectrum of activity, easy availability, better safety profile, and general acceptability to users. This study aimed at evaluating the physicochemical quality and antimicrobial efficacy of the locally manufactured ABHS marketed in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was used to collect ABHS from Addis Ababa marketplaces. A total of 25 sample products were randomly selected from different categories of hand sanitizer manufacturers. The physicochemical evaluation of the products was carried out as per the United States Pharmacopoeia and WHO standards. Escherichia coli, Klebsiella spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, Salmonella spp., and Shigella spp clinical isolates were used for the antimicrobial efficacy test.

RESULTS

The Fourier Transform Infrared result confirmed that all the test products met the identification test for ethanol. The majority (68%) of ABHS complied with the test for ethanol content (75-85% v/v). However, only 3 products fulfilled the hydrogen peroxide content (0.112-0.137% v/v). LPC307 showed the maximum zone of inhibition of 12 mm against Escherichia coli whereas MPC204 exhibited only 3 mm. LPC101 was found to be more sensitive to Shigella and Klebsiella Spp with minimum inhibitory concentration values of 20% and 10%, respectively. The sample product LPC101 showed a minimum bactericidal concentration of 20% against Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Klebsiella spp.

CONCLUSION

One-third of the tested ABHS did not comply with the WHO ethanol content limit and the majority of the products failed to meet the label claim for hydrogen peroxide content. Besides, nearly all products proved that they have activity against all the tested pathogenic microorganisms at a minimum concentration from 10 to 80%; though, they did not show 99.9% bacteriostatic or bactericidal activities as claimed. The study findings suggested regular monitoring of the quality of marketed ABHS considering the current wide use of these products.

Pilot study of using thermal imaging to assess hand hygiene technique

BACKGROUND

Currently, there is no standard method for assessing hand hygiene (HH) technique. We explored the use of thermal imaging to determine if alcohol-based sanitizer (ABHS) has been applied to fingertips and thumbs, areas often missed by healthcare personnel.

METHODS

A FLIR thermal camera attached to an iPhone with FLIR app was used to obtain thermal images of volunteers' dominant hand before and after performing HH with an ABHS. Temperature readings of the mid-palm area, and tips of 3rd finger and thumb were recorded before and at multiple time points after hand hygiene.

RESULTS

In 11 of 12 volunteers, thermal images revealed significant decreases in mid-palm, finger and thumb temperatures after performing HH (P < .01 for all sites), confirming visual assessment of coverage. When HH was performed without including the thumb, a lack of colorimetric change in the thumb was visible. For persons with "cold" fingers at baseline, assessing ABHS coverage of the fingers was more difficult.

CONCLUSIONS

Thermal imaging of HH performance shows promise for assessing HH technique. Additional studies involving a larger number of persons under varying conditions are needed to establish if thermal imaging can be a practical modality for teaching or monitoring HH technique.

Improving visitors' hand hygiene compliance in a pediatric oncology unit

BACKGROUND

Hand hygiene (HH) is the single most important method to prevent infections. We aim at improving HH compliance by visitors to a pediatric oncology unit.

METHODS

A performance improvement project implemented several Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles in July-November 2018. At baseline, a wall-mounted alcohol-based hand sanitizer dispenser was available at the unit entrance. Cycle 1 (visual cue), cycle 2 (visual cue plus verbal symptom screen), and cycle 3 (visual cue, symptom screen, plus HH verbal instructions) were tested. Patient care associates (PCA) positioned at the entrance implemented the cycles and recorded data about visitor's estimated age, day and time of observations, and covert HH compliance monitoring. Participating PCAs were surveyed regarding process feasibility.

RESULTS

Of 1230 (97%) analyzed observations; 204 (17%) were baseline, 293 (24%) in cycle 1, 374 (30%) in cycle 2, and 359 (29%) in cycle 3. The visitors' HH compliance significantly increased to 16.0%, 22.5%, and 48.5% in cycles 1, 2, and 3, respectively, from a baseline of 4.9% (P < .001). Visitors were more likely to perform HH when directly instructed (cycle 3) compared to baseline (adjusted OR = 19.77, 95% CI, 10.30-42.09, P < .001). Although the surveyed PCAs agreed the process is easy and fast, they reported few barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct verbal instructions for HH were the most effective in improving visitors' HH compliance.

Current issues in hand hygiene

BACKGROUND

Multiple aspects of hand hygiene have changed in recent years.

METHODS

A PubMed search was conducted to identify recent articles about hand hygiene.

RESULTS

The COVID-19 pandemic caused temporary changes in hand hygiene compliance rates and shortages of alcohol-based hand sanitizers (ABHSs), and in marketing of some products that were ineffective or unsafe. Fortunately, ABHSs are effective against SARS-CoV-2 and other emerging pathogens including Candida auris and mpox. Proper placement, maintenance, and design of ABHS dispensers have gained additional attention. Current evidence suggests that if an adequate volume of ABHS has been applied to hands, personnel must rub their hands together for at least 15 seconds before hands feel dry (dry time), which is the primary driver of antimicrobial efficacy. Accordingly, practical methods of monitoring hand hygiene technique are needed. Direct observation of hand hygiene compliance remains a challenge in many healthcare facilities, generating increased interest in automated hand hygiene monitoring systems (AHHMSs). However, several barriers have hindered widespread adoption of AHHMSs. AHHMSs must be implemented as part of a multimodal improvement program to successfully improve hand hygiene performance rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Remaining gaps in our understanding of hand hygiene warrant continued research into factors impacting hand hygiene practices.