rss
Emerg Med J 2006;23:349-353 doi:10.1136/emj.2005.026146
  • Original Article

Paediatric emergency department staff perceptions of infection control measures against severe acute respiratory syndrome

  1. M J Parker,
  2. R D Goldman
  1. Pediatric Research in Emergency Therapeutics (PRETx) Program, Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, Department of Pediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  1. Correspondence to:
 Dr R D Goldman
 Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue Toronto, ON M5G 1X8 Canada; ran.goldman{at}sickkids.ca
  • Accepted 5 December 2005

Abstract

Objectives: To determine paediatric emergency department (ED) staff perceptions of the effectiveness and practice of infection control measures against a novel virulent pathogen.

Methods: All medical staff of the paediatric ED in a tertiary medical centre completed a written questionnaire near the onset of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak. Level of concern regarding SARS, and perceptions of effectiveness and use of infection control measures were assessed on a 5 point scale. Statistical analysis was performed using χ2 test and one way analysis of variance with significance at p<0.05.

Results: Response rate was 97% (116/120). All scores were given out of 5 possible points. Using isolation rooms (mean score 4.6), wearing a mask when examining patients (4.5), and handwashing (4.5) were considered most effective. Staff physicians reported handwashing more than nurses and trainees (4.9 v 4.5 and 4.5, respectively; p<0.05) while other measures were reported equally. Respondents considering SARS a high public health threat reported higher compliance with handwashing (4.8 v 4.4), always wearing a mask (3.9 vs 3.2) and gloves (3.6 v 2.9) in the ED (p<0.05), but not eye protection (3.4 v 3.0), gown use (4.9 v 4.7), or wearing a mask when examining patients (5.0 v 4.8). Staff who considered combined infection control measures effective in protecting patients and healthcare workers did not report increased compliance.

Conclusions: Eye protection was perceived as only moderately effective in protecting against the spread of SARS, and reported compliance was relatively poor among ED staff. Concern of SARS as a public health threat rather than perceived effectiveness of infection control measures appears to have a greater impact on compliance.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: none declared

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.