The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), has spread through more than 180 countries, leading to diverse health systems overload around the world. Because of the high number of patients and the supply chain disruption, it generated a shortage of medical devices and personal protective equipment. In this context, initiatives from the additive manufacturing community emerged to fight the lack of devices. Diverse designs were produced and are currently being used in hospitals by patients and health workers. However, as some devices must follow strict standards, these products may not fulfill these standards. Therefore, to ensure the user\'s health, there is a need for understanding each device, their usage, and standards. This study reviews the use of additive manufacturing during COVID-19 pandemic. It gathers the source of several 3D printed devices such as face shields, face masks, valves, nasopharyngeal swabs, and others, discussing their use and regulatory issues. In this regard, the major drawbacks of the technology, addressed for the next pandemic scenario, are highlighted. Finally, some insights of the future of additive manufacturing during emergency are given and discussed.

The novel coronavirus, COVID-19, created a pandemic with significant mortality and morbidity which poses challenges for patients and healthcare workers. The global spread of COVID-19 has resulted in shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) leaving frontline health workers unprotected and overwhelming the healthcare system. 3D printing is well suited to address shortages of masks, face shields, testing kits and ventilators. In this article, we review 3D printing and suggest potential applications for creating PPE for healthcare workers treating COVID-19 patients. A comprehensive literature review was conducted using PubMed with keywords \"Coronavirus disease 2019\", \"COVID-19\", \"severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2\", \"SARS-CoV-2\", \"supply shortages\", \"N95 respirator masks\", \"personal protective equipment\", \"PPE\", \"ventilators\", \"three-dimensional model\", \"three-dimensional printing\" \"3D printing\" and \"ventilator\". A summary of important studies relevant to the development of 3D-printed clinical applications for COVID-19 is presented. 3D technology has great potential to revolutionize healthcare through accessibility, affordably and personalization.

The recent increase in silicosis cases in several countries casts doubt on dust control practices and their effectiveness in preventing respirable crystalline silica (RCS) exposure. Apart from silicosis, RCS may lead to other illnesses, health-related quality of life losses for workers and their families, and economic losses for companies. Thus, this systematic literature review examined the effectiveness of interventions employed to prevent exposure to RCS and increase the use of dust control measures. The review used keywords related to dust control interventions to search seven databases. Search results were screened and extracted for synthesis. The narrative synthesis showed the extent of research investment in China. In several designs and combinations, the interventions utilized water, surfactant, foam, and air currents to reduce dust exposure. These interventions offer varying degrees of dust control effectiveness against RCS and respirable dust. Although evidence indicates that interventions significantly decrease dust concentration levels, the control measures in place may not effectively prevent workplace overexposure to RCS. The review found that education and training interventions are employed to improve dust controls and respiratory protective equipment (RPE) use. Also, marketing strategies promote the use of RPE. These interventions can increase the frequency of use of RPE and the adoption of best practice dust control measures. Interventions increase knowledge, awareness, and attitudes about RPE usage and generate positive perceptions while reducing misconceptions. However, the benefits obtained from an intervention may diminish after its implementation, indicating that the interventions may not continually motivate workers to adopt control measures or use RPE.

During the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) necessitated unprecedented and non-validated approaches to conserve PPE at healthcare facilities, especially in high income countries where single-use disposable PPE was ubiquitous. Our team conducted a systematic literature review to evaluate historic approaches for conserving single-use PPE, expecting that lower-income countries or developing contexts may already be uniquely conserving PPE. However, of the 50 included studies, only 3 originated from middle-income countries and none originated from low-income countries. Data from the included studies suggest PPE remained effective with extended use and with multiple or repeated use in clinical settings, as long as donning and doffing were performed in a standard manner. Multiple decontamination techniques were effective in disinfecting single use PPE for repeated use. These findings can inform healthcare facilities and providers in establishing protocols for safe conservation of PPE supplies and updating existing protocols to improve sustainability and overall resilience. Future studies should evaluate conservation practices in low-resource settings during non-pandemic times to develop strategies for more sustainable and resilient healthcare worldwide.

The coronavirus (COVID-19) global pandemic resulted in the breakdown of traditional supply chains responsible for providing essential equipment to hospitals and personal protective equipment (PPE) for health and social care workers. The three-dimensional (3D) printing community has responded to emerging need by recognizing shortages across health care systems and providing innovative solutions in real time, circumventing short-term global supply issues. A systematic review was undertaken to investigate the role of 3D printing in the COVID-19 pandemic in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 databases. Newspaper and internet article sources were identified using the NEXIS media database. All studies and articles on the application of 3D printed solutions during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic were included. The literature search identified 26 related articles, and 13 studies met inclusion criteria and were suitable for full-text review. One thousand two hundred and one unique digital media articles were identified; after removal of duplicates and screening of headlines for the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 460 articles were suitable for full-text review. The cross-collaboration between the 3D printing community and health care systems has aided in the provision of innovative solutions to combat the COVID-19 crisis. The applications for 3D printing ranged from oxygenation equipment to noninvasive and invasive ventilatory parts and innovative solutions for infection control and quarantine hubs. This review has identified that 3D printing technology has made the biggest contribution to the production of PPE in particular face shields, mirroring the areas of greatest shortage and need. Additive manufacturing has played a pivotal role in aligning disciplines in engineering, science, and medicine for the greater good. We have witnessed the rapid reconfiguration of traditional supply chains to circumvent global shortages, while making advancements in effort to limit the impact of this and future pandemics.

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected millions of people around the world either directly or indirectly. Deaths have been attributed to COVID-19 as the underlying cause of death or as a contributing cause of death. It is estimated that millions of excess deaths were associated with the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021. The importance of a clinical autopsy on COVID-19 corpses lies in understanding the pathogenesis of the disease better. Moreover, a forensic autopsy may be performed on a COVID-19-infected corpse when indicated for medico-legal purposes. From the autopsy perspective, handling COVID-19-infected corpses requires specific guidelines and safety measures to be followed to limit the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the causative virus. This is essential as COVID-19 is an emerging infectious disease caused by a newly discovered virus. This review narrates the safety measures that should be followed at different stages of handling COVID-19 corpses, starting from the death scene to burial and funeral. Ethical issues in handling COVID-19 corpses are also briefed in this review. As COVID-19 can be transmitted through infected bodies, it is crucial to wear recommended personal protective equipment, specifically for aerosol-generating procedures. There are specific safety measures to be considered before transporting the body to the mortuary, with particular requirements to be implemented there, such as specific engineering controls, staff training, and autopsy room precautions. After conducting the autopsy, disinfection of the tools and equipment, body bags, transport vehicles, and the autopsy room should be considered.

It is now widely recognized that health care personnel (HCP) are at risk of contamination with pathogens during personal protective equipment (PPE) doffing. Studies of this phenonemona, have utilized a variety of PPE ensembles, doffing methods, and experimental methods.
A scoping review was performed, consistent with PRISMA guidance. The PubMed and sciVerse Scopus databases were searched using an a priori search strategy. Data were extracted for analysis using the matrix method, and then a narrative analysis was performed. Articles were classified based on PPE ensemble.
Only 19 of 151 articles were included in the final analysis. All included studies reported some post-doffing contamination, and this contamination was most frequently observed on the hands, wrist, face, and neck. Reviewed studies used a variety of tracer contaminants, PPE ensembles, doffing protocols, tracer assessment locations, and methods, making it difficult to identify patterns across studies.
Additional research is needed to improve the study methodology related to the selection and placement of tracers to ensure sensitive detection of post-doffing contamination, compare how specific doffing procedures or pieces of PPE influence post-doffing contamination, and to understand what post-doffing contamination means for patient and HCP infection risk.

The international fire service community is actively engaged in a wide range of activities focused on development, testing, and implementation of effective approaches to reduce exposure to contaminants and the related cancer risk. However, these activities are often viewed independent of each other and in the absence of the larger overall effort of occupational health risk mitigation. This narrative review synthesizes the current research on fire service contamination control in the context of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Hierarchy of Controls, a framework that supports decision making around implementing feasible and effective control solutions in occupational settings. Using this approach, we identify evidence-based measures that have been investigated and that can be implemented to protect firefighters during an emergency response, in the fire apparatus and at the fire station, and identify several knowledge gaps that remain. While a great deal of research and development has been focused on improving personal protective equipment for the various risks faced by the fire service, these measures are considered less effective. Administrative and engineering controls that can be used during and after the firefight have also received increased research interest in recent years. However, less research and development have been focused on higher level control measures such as engineering, substitution, and elimination, which may be the most effective, but are challenging to implement. A comprehensive approach that considers each level of control and how it can be implemented, and that is mindful of the need to balance contamination risk reduction against the fire service mission to save lives and protect property, is likely to be the most effective.

We aimed to provide an overview of how work environment and occupational health are affected, and describe interventions designed to improve the work environment during epidemics and pandemics. The guidelines on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) were followed. The databases Cinahl, Medline, PsycInfo, and Web of Science were searched for population: working population; exposure: coronavirus epidemic or pandemic; and outcome: work environment, in articles published until October 2020. Quality assessment was based on a modified version of the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). After deduplication 3711 articles remained, of which 530 were selected for full-text screening and 119 for quality assessment. After the exclusion of studies that were low quality, 95 remained, of which 85 focused on healthcare personnel and 10 on employees in other industries; 73 used quantitative methods and 22 used qualitative or mixed methods; the majority were based on cross-sectional data. Healthcare staff experienced increased job demands, poor leadership, and lack of resources (personal protective equipment, personnel, and competence). High demands and work with infected patients were associated with negative mental health outcomes. There was a lack of studies assessing interventions, studies from industries other than healthcare, and studies of high quality.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the results, level of evidence, and methodologic quality of original studies regarding surgical mask effectiveness in minimizing viral respiratory illness transmission, and, in particular, the performance of the N95 respirator versus surgical mask.
METHODS: Meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines with use of PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library databases.
RESULTS: Eight studies (9164 participants) were included after screening 153 articles. Analyses showed statistically significant differences between N95 respirator versus surgical mask use to prevent influenza-like-illness (risk ratio [RR] = 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.68-0.94, P < 0.05), non-influenza respiratory viral infection (RR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.52-0.74, P < 0.05), respiratory viral infection (RR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.65-0.82, P < 0.05), severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) 1 and 2 virus infection (RR = 0.17, 95% CI = 0.06-0.49, P < 0.05), and laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infection (RR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.66-0.84, P < 0.05). Analyses did not indicate statistically significant results against laboratory-confirmed influenza (RR = 0.87, CI = 0.74-1.03, P > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: N95 respirator use was associated with fewer viral infectious episodes for healthcare workers compared with surgical masks. The N95 respirator was most effective in reducing the risk of a viral infection in the hospital setting from the SARS-CoV 1 and 2 viruses compared to the other viruses included in this investigation. Methodologic quality, risk of biases, and small number of original studies indicate the necessity for further research to be performed, especially in front-line healthcare delivery settings.