ArticleHealth science reports2021
Assessing personal protective equipment needs for healthcare workers.
Article in Health science reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Airborne infection control measures at HIV settings in India and potential areas for TB cross transmission.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Article
- Challenges to conducting research on oral health with older adults living in long-term care facilities.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Development of a low-cost device for testing glove and condom leakage.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2022Article
- Assessing personal protective equipment needs for healthcare workers.Health science reports · 2021Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPersonal protective equipment (PPE) is critical for healthcare workers (HCWs) since it acts as a barrier to infection transmission; however, current PPE is not ideally suited to their needs due to limitations in protection and comfort. Thus, the purpose of this study was to identify major issues of current PPE for body protection and assess its needs within health care.
methodsAn online survey was conducted with a convenience sample of 200 U.S. healthcare professionals who interact with patients. The survey was designed to identify the types of PPE that HCWs currently use, assess current PPE design features for body protection, examine the effect of PPE design features for body protection, and HCWs' years of work experiences on overall PPE acceptability, and explore current PPE maintenance practices. Both quantitative and qualitative data were used for analyses.
resultsThis study showed the need for current PPE improvement in terms of fit, comfort, mobility, and donning and doffing for HCWs' safety and health. Donning and doffing plays an important role in HCWs' overall acceptance of PPE for body protection. This study revealed that most HCWs dispose of their PPE in a trashcan in a healthcare unit and non-disposed PPE is laundered at home, which may expose their family members to a health risk if a proper precaution is not followed.
conclusionThis study provides critical insights for the needs of (a) novel PPE design research and (b) proper donning and doffing training and its strict regulatory effort to ensure HCWs' safety and health.
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.