West Africa needs the help of the other countries to end this crisis and find methods of preventing and treating future outbreaks.
There was a protocol for HIV health care workers with the discovery of AZT. If a health care worker experienced a needle stick, no matter how minor, they were started for a course of AZT. The research shows it ends the early population of virus so the infection can never take hold. There isn't that type of intervention with Ebola because there isn't any reliable supply of treatment.
The waiting for FIRST symptoms is the best that can be used currently in treatment of the disease. The release of so many today and the fact a technician on a ship wasn't infected shows there is a degree of protection in prudent technique. I have to say I was not surprised the technician on the cruise ship was negative for the virus. Technicians working with direct blood contract have some of the best of medical technology to prevent contact with that blood. So, when she was found healthy without exposure it all made sense.
She had a limited 'timeline' for exposure that required MINIMAL contact with patient body fluids. When she came in contact with blood into a vile for detection of the virus it was already contained in the technology she used. Her chances of contracting Ebola was very low considering her technique and equipment. But, professionals didn't know that about the disease so they are exceptionally protective of the public in requiring blood tests and quarantine.
What is unknown to medical research requires the highest levels of protection for the public. No one in the public was ever at risk. When nurses care for a patient it is over a much longer timeline with far less technology to assist them unless they are at NIH or one of the other hospitals with biocontainment units.
Nurses when facing these diseases have to don much more protective equipment than is usually found in any hospital in the USA. This may be a reason to revisit "Universal Precautions" and determine when higher levels of protection is needed. But, that is the only place I can think of that needs review. The nurses in Dallas simply didn't have the proper equipment to be safe. Let's hope they get well soon, and the King Charles Spaniel is well, too.
Perhaps Universal Precautions need to include a course for every nurse in biocontainment and the differences in the equipment and the protection level. Simply the knowledge of the difference will alter bedside technique by nurses across the board. They will be more aware of their own safety. Nurses trained in such technology will also be ready to apply those biocontainment measures should they be necessary.
I would think department leadership should be reading the weekly publication of the CDC about the trend of illness. But, that weekly review should also have a section on threats outside the USA, technology used for those threats and know when it might become an emergency for the USA. Mutation is a primary driver of larger infection rates and if anyone asked a Nursing Vice President what exactly mutation is and how it effects her practice they couldn't tell you. I'd bet real money on it.
Most administrative types would not know what the "Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report" is, but, they could tell you the Hospital Rate for nosocomial infections and where exactly in the hospital it is the most problem.
The certifying agency, The Joint Commission, (click here) is famous for putting more responsibility on the backs of nurses, but, have never demanded a change in working conditions should they be unfavorable for the staff.
Someone needs to tell The Joint Commission they ALSO have to focus on the nurse-patient ratio and the stress levels in nursing with appropriate intervention to reduce them. They also need to require hospitals to pass inspection in Infection Disease Management.
Nursing and their leadership are patient focused and conduct very little research that benefit the nurse community. The nursing profession is really ignored in many ways by it's own leadership. What the profession requires of it's members would never be tolerated by physicians.
Every medical and nursing director in the USA should be required to have a CDC Certification in Infectious Disease, Mutation and Prevention. Such a certification should be renewed annually no different than ACLS for the staff.
No silly online course either. They need to tour NIH and understand the infrastructure that is there to serve every American. The initial course should require NIH hands on experience and that aspect of the certification every five years there after.
There was a protocol for HIV health care workers with the discovery of AZT. If a health care worker experienced a needle stick, no matter how minor, they were started for a course of AZT. The research shows it ends the early population of virus so the infection can never take hold. There isn't that type of intervention with Ebola because there isn't any reliable supply of treatment.
The waiting for FIRST symptoms is the best that can be used currently in treatment of the disease. The release of so many today and the fact a technician on a ship wasn't infected shows there is a degree of protection in prudent technique. I have to say I was not surprised the technician on the cruise ship was negative for the virus. Technicians working with direct blood contract have some of the best of medical technology to prevent contact with that blood. So, when she was found healthy without exposure it all made sense.
She had a limited 'timeline' for exposure that required MINIMAL contact with patient body fluids. When she came in contact with blood into a vile for detection of the virus it was already contained in the technology she used. Her chances of contracting Ebola was very low considering her technique and equipment. But, professionals didn't know that about the disease so they are exceptionally protective of the public in requiring blood tests and quarantine.
What is unknown to medical research requires the highest levels of protection for the public. No one in the public was ever at risk. When nurses care for a patient it is over a much longer timeline with far less technology to assist them unless they are at NIH or one of the other hospitals with biocontainment units.
Nurses when facing these diseases have to don much more protective equipment than is usually found in any hospital in the USA. This may be a reason to revisit "Universal Precautions" and determine when higher levels of protection is needed. But, that is the only place I can think of that needs review. The nurses in Dallas simply didn't have the proper equipment to be safe. Let's hope they get well soon, and the King Charles Spaniel is well, too.
Perhaps Universal Precautions need to include a course for every nurse in biocontainment and the differences in the equipment and the protection level. Simply the knowledge of the difference will alter bedside technique by nurses across the board. They will be more aware of their own safety. Nurses trained in such technology will also be ready to apply those biocontainment measures should they be necessary.
Most administrative types would not know what the "Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report" is, but, they could tell you the Hospital Rate for nosocomial infections and where exactly in the hospital it is the most problem.
The certifying agency, The Joint Commission, (click here) is famous for putting more responsibility on the backs of nurses, but, have never demanded a change in working conditions should they be unfavorable for the staff.
Someone needs to tell The Joint Commission they ALSO have to focus on the nurse-patient ratio and the stress levels in nursing with appropriate intervention to reduce them. They also need to require hospitals to pass inspection in Infection Disease Management.
Nursing and their leadership are patient focused and conduct very little research that benefit the nurse community. The nursing profession is really ignored in many ways by it's own leadership. What the profession requires of it's members would never be tolerated by physicians.
Every medical and nursing director in the USA should be required to have a CDC Certification in Infectious Disease, Mutation and Prevention. Such a certification should be renewed annually no different than ACLS for the staff.
No silly online course either. They need to tour NIH and understand the infrastructure that is there to serve every American. The initial course should require NIH hands on experience and that aspect of the certification every five years there after.
