Abstract
Background Rigorous assessment of occupational COVID-19 risk and personal protective equipment (PPE) use are not well-described. We evaluated 9-1-1 emergency medical services (EMS) encounters for patients with COVID-19 to assess occupational exposure, programmatic strategies to reduce exposure, and PPE use.
Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort investigation of lab-confirmed COVID-19 patients in King County, WA who received 9-1-1 EMS responses from February 14, 2020 to March 26, 2020. We reviewed dispatch, EMS, and public health surveillance records to evaluate the temporal relationship between exposure and programmatic changes to EMS operations designed to identify high-risk patients, protect the workforce, and conserve PPE.
Results There were 274 EMS encounters for 220 unique COVID-19 patients involving 700 unique EMS providers with 988 EMS person-encounters. Use of “full” PPE including mask, eye protection, gown and gloves (MEGG) was 67%. There were 151 person-exposures among 129 individuals, who required 981 quarantine days. Of the 700 EMS providers, 3 (0.4%) tested positive within 14 days of encounter. Programmatic changes were associated with a temporal reduction in exposures. When stratified at the study encounters midpoint, 94% (142/151) of exposures occurred during the first 137 EMS encounters compared to 6% (9/151) during the second 137 EMS encounters (p<0.01). By the investigation’s final week, EMS deployed MEGG PPE in 34% (3579/10,468) of all EMS person-encounters.
Conclusion Less than 0.5% of EMS providers experienced COVID-19 illness within 14 days of occupational encounter. Programmatic strategies were associated with a reduction in exposures, while achieving a measured use of PPE.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was approved by the University of Washington Institutional Review Board.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data relevant to the study are included in the article.
