ArticleIndian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine2023
Fogging of Protective Eyewear in Intensive Care Unit and a Comparative Study of Techniques to Reduce It.
Article in Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Erratum to "Fogging of Protective Eyewear in Intensive Care Unit and A Comparative Study of Techniques to Reduce It".Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Fogging of protective eyewear (PEW) can hinder routine work in the intensive care unit (ICU). The prevalence of fogging impairing vision (FIV) and the technique that reduces fogging have not been evaluated previously. Methods: After donning personal protective equipment (PPE) with an N95 mask, the healthcare workers (HCWs) sequentially tried plain PEW, soap-coated PEW, PEW worn at a distance over the PPE hood, and the use of tape over a mask. The vision (distant and near) was checked before wearing PEW and with each technique. The prevalence of fogging and FIV, that is, change in vision in either eye was estimated and compared among various techniques. Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to analyze factors affecting fogging and to compare techniques. Room temperature, room humidity, and lens temperature were measured during the study. Results: A total of 125 HCWs participated (151 observations) and the prevalence of FIV was 66.7%. The fogging of PEW, as well as the extent of PEW fogging, was least with soap coating followed by a mask with tape and goggles worn at a distance. The FIV was significantly lesser only with the mask with tape with an odds ratio (OR) [confidence interval CI)] of 0.45 (0.25-0.82). The prevalence of fogging while at work in the COVID ICU was 38%. Conclusion: The prevalence of FIV is 66%. Application of tape over the mask can avoid disturbances in vision best. Soap coating of the PEW and PEW worn at distance from the eyes are potential alternatives. How to cite this article: Ravisankar NP, D'Silva CS, Varma MMKG, Sudarsan TI, Sampath S, Thomas T,
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.