Conectar
Climate degradation poses a significant global health challenge, with healthcare systems paradoxically contributing to this issue while adhering to the principle of ‘do no harm’. Notably, the healthcare sector accounts for a considerable share of greenhouse gas emissions in many industrialised countries, primarily due to the supply chain, including pharmaceuticals, disposable medical devices and personal protective equipment (PPE). The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated this issue, with millions of tons of CO2 emissions attributed to single-use PPE. In response to the pandemic, some hospitals have begun adopting and implementing reusable PPE as a sustainable alternative to reduce emissions, enhance resilience to supply chain disruptions and achieve cost savings. This scoping review aims to synthesise the available evidence on the adoption, implementation barriers and facilitators, as well as the impacts of reusable PPE in hospital settings.
This protocol is based on York’s five-stage framework outlined by Arksey and O’Malley. We will map evidence on the environmental and economic impacts of reusable versus disposable PPE, and the associated infection risks. Using an adapted Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, our scoping review will identify enablers and barriers to implementation across different clinical settings. The methodology will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Review guidelines and will include a comprehensive search of peer-reviewed articles in five databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and Global Health) and grey literature. Databases will be searched from inception to December 2024. Two reviewers will independently evaluate the eligibility of all identified titles and abstracts for inclusion in the full-text review, as well as for data extraction. Descriptive data will provide insights into the enablers and facilitators of reusable PPE adoption and implementation, along with its impacts on patient and staff safety, costs, the environment and supply chain resilience to disruptions will be reported.
We expect the results to both identify research gaps and generate novel ideas for future studies on transitioning to reusable PPE in healthcare settings. This review will offer healthcare decision-makers valuable insights into the factors influencing the shift from disposable to reusable PPE and its associated impacts. By refining PPE management strategies, the findings will enable managers to clearly understand the challenges and anticipated outcomes, thereby guiding effective decision-making and facilitating a smooth transition that minimises operational disruptions while upholding patient and staff safety. Ethics approval was not required for this review. The findings will be shared through conferences on healthcare management and sustainability, and submitted to peer-reviewed journals in healthcare management and implementation science.
This randomised controlled clinical trial compared the efficacy of a standardised autologous platelet gel (RegenWound gel) (n = 48) with a standard care treatment (hydrocellular or hydrocolloid dressing) (n = 48) for the treatment of hard-to-heal foot ulcers in type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus patients > 18 years old. The primary outcomes were the percentage of ulcers healed 6 weeks after treatment commenced. The secondary outcomes were the average healing time, the time course of the healing process, the local tolerance, and the acceptability of the treatment by the patient compared to the standard treatment. At the 6 weeks end-of-treatment visit (ETV), 56.5% of the patients in the RegenWound gel group and 20.0% of the patients in the control group had completely healed. Healing continued to evolve after the ETV and reached 77.3% at end-of-study visit 2 (12 weeks) in the RegenWound gel group, compared to 35.1% for the control group. The treatment was well tolerated and safe. RegenWound gel could be an effective treatment for diabetic foot ulcers, with most patients being healed within 6 weeks of treatment, and on average 1 to 2 treatments being needed.
Trial Registration: ISRCTN10032417
To determine prognostic factors of disability in multiple sclerosis (MS), that is, (1) identify determinants of the dynamics of disability progression; (2) study the effectiveness of disease-modifying treatments (DMTs); (3) merge determinants and DMTs for creating patient-centred prognostic tools and (4) conduct an economic analysis.
Individuals registered in the French Observatoire Francais de la Sclérose en Plaques (OFSEP) database were included in this OFSEP-high definition cohort if they had a diagnosis of MS, were ≥15 years old and had an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score
A cohort of 2842 individuals, 73.4% women, mean (SD) age of 42.7 (11.6) years, median disease duration of 8.8 years, has been recruited from July 2018 to September 2020. The course of MS was relapsing remitting in 67.7%, secondary progressive in 11.9%. The mean annual relapse rate was 0.98. The disease-modifying treatment received was highly effective therapy in 50.3% and moderately effective therapy in 30.7%.
The participants will be followed until December 2026. Disease course up to four landmarks will be examined as predictors of disease progression: (1) diagnosis of MS; (2) relapse activity worsening and independent progression; (3) any recent disease activity and (4) any visit with absence of disease activity in the past 5 years. The marginal effectiveness and tolerability of treatments will be assessed. Stratified algorithms will be proposed for medical decision-making. Economic evaluation of disease cost and cost-effectiveness of new DMTs will be conducted from a public payer perspective.
FreshRSS