ArticleClinics in dermatology
Availability of personal protective equipment among dermatologists in the COVID-19 pandemic: Assessment and risk factors in a web-based, global study.
Article in Clinics in dermatology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dermatology in a multidisciplinary approach with infectious disease and obstetric medicine against COVID-19.International journal of women's dermatology · 2021Review
- Commentary: COVID-19 pandemic - 1 Year later.Clinics in dermatologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe availability of personal protective equipment (PPE) among dermatologists during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has not been studied.
methodsWe have assessed PPE availability among dermatologists and relevant aspects of hospital service by surveying 733 dermatologists.
resultsConsiderable percentages of respondents had to purchase their own PPE (40.2%) and were not provided with it at the hospital (37.7%). Only 27% of respondents provided hospital service, and 18.4% were assigned to nondermatologic duty. A substantial percentage (64.4%) indicated the availability of hospital-issued management guidelines (HIMG) for COVID-19 patients. Nearly half of the survey participants (49.1%) responded that the health care system was not equipped for the pandemic. Purchasing one's own PPE was strongly associated with the private practice setting and continent, with the highest rates in Central and South America and in Europe (P < .001). PPE availability at a hospital was associated with 2 continents, with the highest rates in Europe and in North America (P < .001). In logistic regression, the most important factor reducing the odds ratio (OR) for purchasing their own PPE was HIMG for COVID-19 patients (OR, 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.97). Respondents' assessment that the health care system was equipped for COVID-19 was the most powerful increaser of OR for PPE availability (OR, 9.43; 95% CI, 5.37-16.56) followed by >1,000 COVID-19 cases in a participant's country.
conclusionsSubstantial percentages of respondents had to purchase their own PPE and were not provided with it at the hospital. Strategies to increase PPE availability should be implemented by hospitals, industry, and government authorities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.