Cargando…
Aerosol containment device design considerations and performance evaluation metrics
BACKGROUND: Spurred by the Coronavirus infectious disease 2019 pandemic, aerosol containment devices (ACDs) were developed to capture infectious respiratory aerosols generated by patients at their source. Prior reviews indicated that such devices had low evidence of effectiveness, but did not addres...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9650508/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36435005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2022.11.007 |
_version_ | 1784828036061855744 |
---|---|
author | Jones, Rachael M. Andrus, Niles Dominguez, Thomas Biggs, Jeremy Hansen, Brian Drews, Frank A. |
author_facet | Jones, Rachael M. Andrus, Niles Dominguez, Thomas Biggs, Jeremy Hansen, Brian Drews, Frank A. |
author_sort | Jones, Rachael M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Spurred by the Coronavirus infectious disease 2019 pandemic, aerosol containment devices (ACDs) were developed to capture infectious respiratory aerosols generated by patients at their source. Prior reviews indicated that such devices had low evidence of effectiveness, but did not address how ACDs should be evaluated, how well they should perform, nor have clearly defined performance standards. Towards developing design criteria for ACDs, two questions were posed: 1) What characteristics have guided the design of ACDs? 2) How have these characteristics been evaluated? METHODS: A scoping review was performed consistent with PRISMA guidelines. Data were extracted with respect to general study information, intended use of the device, device design characteristics and evaluation. RESULTS: Fifty-four articles were included. Evaluation was most commonly performed with respect to device aerosol containment (n = 31, 61%), with only 5 (9%), 3 (6%) and 8 (15%) formally assessing providing experience, patient experience and procedure impact, respectively. Nearly all of the studies that explored provider experience and procedure impact studied intubation. Few studies provided a priori performance criteria for any evaluation metric, or referenced any external guidelines by which to bench mark performance. CONCLUSION: With respect to aerosol containment, ACDs should reduce exposure among HCP with the device compared with the absence of the device, and provide ≥90% reduction in respirable aerosols, equivalent in performance to N95 filtering facepiece respirators, if the goal is to reduce reliance on personal protective equipment. The ACD should not increase awkward or uncomfortable postures, or adversely impact biomechanics of the procedure itself as this could have implications for procedure outcomes. A variety of standardized instruments exist to assess the experience of patients and healthcare personnel. Integration of ACDs into routine clinical practice requires rigorous studies of aerosol containment and the user experience. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9650508 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96505082022-11-14 Aerosol containment device design considerations and performance evaluation metrics Jones, Rachael M. Andrus, Niles Dominguez, Thomas Biggs, Jeremy Hansen, Brian Drews, Frank A. Am J Emerg Med Article BACKGROUND: Spurred by the Coronavirus infectious disease 2019 pandemic, aerosol containment devices (ACDs) were developed to capture infectious respiratory aerosols generated by patients at their source. Prior reviews indicated that such devices had low evidence of effectiveness, but did not address how ACDs should be evaluated, how well they should perform, nor have clearly defined performance standards. Towards developing design criteria for ACDs, two questions were posed: 1) What characteristics have guided the design of ACDs? 2) How have these characteristics been evaluated? METHODS: A scoping review was performed consistent with PRISMA guidelines. Data were extracted with respect to general study information, intended use of the device, device design characteristics and evaluation. RESULTS: Fifty-four articles were included. Evaluation was most commonly performed with respect to device aerosol containment (n = 31, 61%), with only 5 (9%), 3 (6%) and 8 (15%) formally assessing providing experience, patient experience and procedure impact, respectively. Nearly all of the studies that explored provider experience and procedure impact studied intubation. Few studies provided a priori performance criteria for any evaluation metric, or referenced any external guidelines by which to bench mark performance. CONCLUSION: With respect to aerosol containment, ACDs should reduce exposure among HCP with the device compared with the absence of the device, and provide ≥90% reduction in respirable aerosols, equivalent in performance to N95 filtering facepiece respirators, if the goal is to reduce reliance on personal protective equipment. The ACD should not increase awkward or uncomfortable postures, or adversely impact biomechanics of the procedure itself as this could have implications for procedure outcomes. A variety of standardized instruments exist to assess the experience of patients and healthcare personnel. Integration of ACDs into routine clinical practice requires rigorous studies of aerosol containment and the user experience. The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. 2023-02 2022-11-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9650508/ /pubmed/36435005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2022.11.007 Text en © 2022 The Authors Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. |
spellingShingle | Article Jones, Rachael M. Andrus, Niles Dominguez, Thomas Biggs, Jeremy Hansen, Brian Drews, Frank A. Aerosol containment device design considerations and performance evaluation metrics |
title | Aerosol containment device design considerations and performance evaluation metrics |
title_full | Aerosol containment device design considerations and performance evaluation metrics |
title_fullStr | Aerosol containment device design considerations and performance evaluation metrics |
title_full_unstemmed | Aerosol containment device design considerations and performance evaluation metrics |
title_short | Aerosol containment device design considerations and performance evaluation metrics |
title_sort | aerosol containment device design considerations and performance evaluation metrics |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9650508/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36435005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2022.11.007 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jonesrachaelm aerosolcontainmentdevicedesignconsiderationsandperformanceevaluationmetrics AT andrusniles aerosolcontainmentdevicedesignconsiderationsandperformanceevaluationmetrics AT dominguezthomas aerosolcontainmentdevicedesignconsiderationsandperformanceevaluationmetrics AT biggsjeremy aerosolcontainmentdevicedesignconsiderationsandperformanceevaluationmetrics AT hansenbrian aerosolcontainmentdevicedesignconsiderationsandperformanceevaluationmetrics AT drewsfranka aerosolcontainmentdevicedesignconsiderationsandperformanceevaluationmetrics |