Risk assessment and the use of personal protective equipment in an emergency department: Differing perspectives of emergency and infection control clinicians. A video-vignette survey.

The use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in emergency departments (EDs) is an important defense during infectious disease emergencies. However, what counts as appropriate PPE in EDs is contentious and inconsistently implemented in practice. An online scenario-based video survey was distributed through purposive sampling, and completed by 270 ED and infection prevention and control clinicians in Australia. A descriptive content analysis was performed on the data, and differences between groups were tested using Fisher exact test. Participants agreed that most items were required in both scenarios. Eye protection, mask use, and hand hygiene frequency were more contentious. Physicians were more likely than nurses, and ED clinicians more likely than infection prevention and control clinicians, to regard items or actions as optional rather than essential. Many ED clinicians, particularly physicians, regarded sequences as too time-consuming to be practical in a busy ED. Our findings likely reflect differences in professional roles, competing priorities, and risks, and highlight important contextual characteristics of EDs, such as diagnostic uncertainty, equipment inaccessibility, and resource constraints. To be feasible, practicable, and thereby effective, PPE guidance in the ED must be designed collaboratively with frontline ED staff, and reflects the complexities of their practice. • Personal protective equipment (PPE) in emergency departments (EDs) can be contentious • Infection control and ED clinicians agree on the necessity of most PPE items. • ED clinicians find PPE guidance less practicable than infection control clinicians. • Infection prevention guidelines for EDs must be designed for ED contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]