A prospective clinical evaluation of a patient isolation hood during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Forbes McGain, Samantha Bates, Jung Hoon Lee and 4 others
PMID 34144863WHAT IT FOUND
Twenty ICU/ED patients and staff found the isolation hood acceptable, with no patient adverse events.
It did not prove reduced transmission and sometimes affected communication and comfort.
Key findings
01Twenty ICU/ED patients used the isolation hood for a median of 3 days, and no patient-related safety adverse events were reported.
02Sixty eligible HCW surveys were overall favourable, and 60/60 responses rated the hood safe.
03Eight of 20 patients completed the survey; seven of eight were favourable, and all eight said the hood helped prevent cross infection, was safe and comfortable.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only 20 patients used the hood, and the study was unblinded and done at one hospital. Only 8 of 20 patients completed the patient survey. The staff infection data were not adjusted for confounders, and no viral loads were measured inside or outside the hood. The hood was used with usual care and respiratory therapies, so the contribution of the hood alone cannot be separated. Some shift logs showed the hood was not down and fan on for part of the shift, and patient comments reported noise, heat, and communication difficulty.
Declared interests
A patent for the hood was filed by the University of Melbourne/Western Health. The lead authors were leads in the patent application. All other authors declared no conflicts.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that the isolation hood reduced healthcare worker infection rates. The study was unblinded, did not measure viral loads, and the authors state that no causal inference can be drawn.