Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41004481›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Layers of exposure risk management measures for the prevention and control of infections of healthcare workers treating COVID-19 patients.

Neştian Ștefan Andrei, Turnea Elena-Sabina, Tiţă Silviu-Mihail, Vodă Ana-Iolanda, Poroch Vladimir

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Neştian Ștefan AndreiDepartment of Management, Marketing and Business Administration, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iași, Iași, Romania.
Turnea Elena-SabinaDepartment of Management, Marketing and Business Administration, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iași, Iași, Romania.ORCID 0000-0001-8986-6422
Tiţă Silviu-MihailDepartment of Management, Marketing and Business Administration, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iași, Iași, Romania.
Vodă Ana-IolandaDepartment of Management, Marketing and Business Administration, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iași, Iași, Romania.
Poroch VladimirGrigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Iași, Romania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCOVID-19 has changed the way hospitals manage infections and how healthcare workers (HCWs) carry out their activities. The pandemic has taught us how safety, hygiene and work schedules should be implemented. After the pandemic, a substantial body of research has examined the managerial capacities of health systems, national prevention programmes, and crisis-response strategies.

objectiveThe aim of this study is to determine the most critical risk management measures in the context of COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus both prevention and post-factum control measures. METHODOLOGY: We conducted a study using a questionnaire previously validated by the World Health Organization, adapted to identify the key organisational measures for preventing and controlling infections during interactions with patients infected with COVID-19 virus. The setting for the study was the "Sf. Ioan cel Nou" County Emergency Hospital, Suceava, Romania. A total of 312 responses were collected between 10.10.2020 and 19.03.2021. The study complied with two ethical protocols, data were analysed using 21.0 version of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software.

resultsStatistical analysis identified four constructs grouping the measures - technical, organisational, human resources, and others, all aimed at preventing the spread of SARS-CoV-2 within and beyond the hospital. In our vision, these four main resulted constructs could be conceptualised similarly to a security system, which aims protects an "asset" from a threat by applying several layers that gradually reduce risk to near zero. Specifically, the first layer involves managing exposure risk by separating contaminated from uncontaminated areas; the second comprises general preventive measures for healthcare workers operating in contaminated areas; the third layer addresses staff attendance and workplace organisation, and the fourth focuses on risks perceived and manifested at the individual level.

conclusionExposure risk assessment and management follow a logic similar to that of a security system designed to protect an "asset" from a threat. In our case, the health of the HCWs was at risk due to their interactions with COVID-19 patients at "Sf. Ioan cel Nou" County Emergency Hospital, Suceava, Romania. Hypothesis testing indicated that all implemented measures contributed significantly to pandemic management, although a functional exposure risk management system requires effective risk reduction across all 4 layers. Given the validity of the second hypothesis - that preventive measures were generally applied at the hospital - we can conclude that HCWs and managers may primarily focus on this type of preventive measure, mainly addressing the second layer alone. This imbalance risks diverting managerial attention and resources toward the second layer at the expense of the other three.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health PersonnelInfection ControlOccupational ExposureRisk ManagementAdultFemaleHumansMalePandemicsRomaniaSARS-CoV-2Surveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID41004481
PMCPMC12469337

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.