This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
1228 infection control & hospital epidemiology october 2015, vol. 36, no. 10


Thus, we recommend that physical cleaning of visibly con- taminated areas be performed before PPE removal. Third, future studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of using the booth for disinfection of contaminated PPE worn by personnel in Ebola virus training sessions. In addition, studies are needed to evaluate strategies to optimize the safety of UV-C for PPE disinfection (eg, use of UV-C for disinfection of selected areas of PPE rather than for full-body disinfection).


acknowledgments


grants from Steris, Clorox, Cubist, and Gojo and has served on scientific advisory boards for 3M, Cubist, and Merck. All other authors report no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.


Daylight Medical provided the UV-C booth for testing and it was returned after completion of the experiments. The company did not have any role in planning or design of the study nor was any compensation received. Financial support.Department of Veterans Affairs (MeritReview grant to C.J.D). Potential conflicts of interest. C.J.D reports that he has received research


references


1. Williams C, McGraw P, Schneck EE, et al. Impact of universal gloving and gowning on health care worker clothing contamination. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36:431–437.


2. Fischer WA, Hynes NA, Perl TM. Protecting healthcare workers from Ebola: personal protective equipment is critical but is not enough. Ann Intern Med 2014;161:753–754.


3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Guidance on personal protective equipment to be used by healthcare workers during management of patients with Ebola virus disease in U.S. hospitals, including procedures for putting on (donning) and removing (doffing). CDC website. http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/healthcare- us/ppe/guidance.html. Published 2014. Accessed March 12, 2015.


4. Tomas ME, Kundrapu S, Thota P, et al. Frequent contamination of the skin and clothing of healthcare personnel during removal of personal protective equipment: a multicenter evaluation and educational intervention. In: Program and abstracts of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) Spring 2015 Conference; May 14-17, 2015; Orlando, FL. Abstract 7160.


Affiliations: 1. Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Cleveland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio; 2. Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio; 3. Research Service, Louis Stokes Cleveland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio; 4. Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio.


Address correspondence to Curtis J. Donskey, MD, Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center (1110 W), Cleveland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 10701 East Boulevard, Cleveland, Ohio 44106 (curtisd123@ yahoo.com).


Received March 31, 2015; accepted: June 18, 2015; electronically published


July 20, 2015 © 2015 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved. 0899-823X/2015/3610-0013. DOI: 10.1017/ice.2015.166


5. Sagripanti J, Lytle CD. Sensitivity to ultraviolet radiation of Lassa, vaccinia, and Ebola viruses dried on surfaces. Arch Virol 2011;156:489–494.


6. Lytle CD, Sagripanti JL. Predicted inactivation of viruses of relevance to biodefense by solar radiation. JVirol 2005;79: 14244–14252.


7. Jinadatha C, Simmons S, Dale C, et al. Disinfecting personal protec- tive equipment with pulsed xenon ultraviolet as a risk mitigation strategy for health careworkers. AmJ Infect Control 2015;43:412–414.


8. O’Connell KP, Bucher JR, Anderson PE, et al. Real-time fluoro- genic reverse transcription-PCR assays for detection of bacteriophage MS2. Appl Environ Microbiol 2006;72:478–483.


9. Nerandzic MM,Cadnum JL, Pultz MJ, Donskey CJ. Evaluation of an automated ultraviolet radiation device for decontamination of Clostridium difficile and other healthcare-associated pathogens in hospital rooms. BMC Infect Dis 2010;10:197.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140