Author: Yan Ling Apollonia Tay, Medical Student, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand. DermNet Editor in Chief: Adjunct A/Prof Amanda Oakley, Dermatologist, Hamilton, New Zealand. Copy edited by Gus Mitchell. April 2020.
Personal protective equipment (PPE) generally consists of wearable items designed to shield users from environmental hazards. These hazards may be physical, chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear in nature. PPE can be used in a variety of situations and configurations depending on the type of exposure.
A commonly held misconception is that PPE will fully protect users from harm. There will always be an element of risk when working in a hazardous environment. The purpose of properly used PPE is to reduce this risk of harm.
Ames hazmat suit
Occupational Safety Equipment
Who uses personal protective equipment?
PPE is particularly used in the workplace due to exposure to occupational hazards. Occupations that require this hazard protection can include:
Heat-proof gloves made of acrylic prevent thermal burns or welding burns.
Durable plastic gloves may protect the hands from some harsh chemicals that could cause burns or irritation.
Kevlar gloves protect from physical trauma such as cutting knives in abattoirs.
Foot protection
Boots made of different materials are used to protect the feet.
Rubber boots guard against fluid splashes and prevent slips.
Steel-toe boots prevent traumatic foot injuries.
Healthcare PPE
Green gloves in surgery
Personal protective equipment during minor skin surgery
How to use personal protective equipment effectively
PPE needs to be selected and sized carefully to best reduce exposure to specific hazards [3]. Professional organisations usually have specific guidelines for PPE selection within particular workplace settings.
PPE needs to be put on (donned) and removed (doffed) according to proper protocol [4].
If PPE is not donned correctly, protection may be incomplete due to improper fit.
Improper doffing may cause contamination after the exposure.
Studies in healthcare workers have shown that the rate of contamination is reduced if the worker had completed a structured PPE training course [5]. Hence, PPE education sessions are highly recommended for all users. There is also evidence that supervised PPE use can decrease the rate of PPE protocol deviations and improve the quality of protection [6].
What are the side effects and risks of personal protective equipment?
While PPE is extremely useful, some people may experience an unwanted side effect from PPE use, such as [7]:
Mechanical skin damage eg, friction and occlusion.
Up to 99% of cutaneous side effects caused by occupational PPE are due to gloves, especially in healthcare workers [8]. Non-glove related dermatoses are more common in manufacturing [7].
Overheating
Overheating due to PPE is very common [9]. PPE may cause an increase in body temperature by preventing heat from being lost via sweat evaporation [10]. Heavier forms of PPE may also increase body heat production due to the increased work of carrying the PPE.
Sweat loss and dehydration from overheating can cause heat-related illness, ranging from a mild heat rash (miliaria) to a life-threatening heat stroke [11]. Cooling measures should be undertaken immediately if there are any signs of heat illness [11].
Contact irritant dermatitis
Most contact dermatitis due to PPE is classified as irritant contact dermatitis, where the dermatitis is dose-related rather than due to the development of a hypersensitivity type of immune reaction. Examples of irritant reactions associated with PPE include:
Rough clothing such as seams or woollen fibres rubbing on sensitive skin
Chemicals penetrating through leaks in coveralls
Skin hypersensitivity reactions
Type I and type IV hypersensitivity reactions may develop to specific materials or chemicals used to make PPE.
Type I hypersensitivity typically presents immediately after exposure with acute urticaria or anaphylaxis. Type 1 allergens are identified with a skin prick test and may include latexprotein in rubber gloves.
Once an allergen is identified, contact with it should be avoided where possible.
Mechanical skin damage
Facial ulcers and acne have been reported in those who wear goggles or a mask for a long period of time due to pressure effects.
An ulcer is an open defect in the skin barrier. Prolonged pressure on the skin from a mask or a pair of goggles can cause a disruption in blood supply and subsequently, the death of overlying skin. This results in the formation of a pressure ulcer.
Acne mechanica is a complication of acne vulgaris. Pressure and friction on existing acne vulgaris can cause micro-abrasions that exacerbateinflammation [13]. The pustules may become deeper and more enlarged with continued pressure [14].
Irritant contact dermatitis occurs when the skin is directly exposed to soap and water, alcohol (in a sanitiser), or a harsh physical or chemical irritant. The irritant damages the skin barrier, enabling other irritants to enter the skin. This leads to local inflammation, pain, and itching.
Damaged skin is also more likely to develop a secondary bacterial infection [14]. Hence, measures should be taken to prevent skin damage such as removing the source of irritation and limiting the number of hours spent in PPE [13–15].
Regular face washing with a gentle cleanser may help with acne mechanica [14]. A lubricant or moisturiser may be applied at pressure areas [13].
Personal protective equipment for healthcare workers in the COVID-19 era
The Center for Disease Control (CDC) recommends the following personal protective equipment for use in high-risk situations:
gloves
long-sleeved isolation gown
respiratory protection at a minimum a N95 fitted respirator. Powered air-purifying respirators should be available for very high risk procedures.
front and side eye protection such as goggles and/or face shield.
PPE is only protective if used correctly, particularly when donning and doffing the equipment. A buddy system is recommended to monitor the procedure as well as education and frequent practice to reduce the risk of self-contamination. Decontamination of gloves prior to doffing may further reduce the infection risk. PPE is the least effective tool in the CDC Hierarchy of Controls model to minimise the risk of infection for healthcare workers.
References
Siegel JD, Rhinehart E, Jackson M, Chiarello L; Health Care Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. 2007 guideline for isolation precautions: preventing transmission of infectious agents in health care settings. Am J Infect Control. 2007;35(10 Suppl 2):S65-S164. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2007.10.007. PubMed
Lepelletier D, Keita-Perse O, Parneix P, et al. Respiratory protective equipment at work: good practices for filtering facepiece (FFP) mask. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2019;38(11):2193-5. doi:10.1007/s10096-019-03642-8.PubMed
Mumma JM, Durso FT, Ferguson AN, et al. Human factors risk analyses of a doffing protocol for ebola-level personal protective equipment: mapping errors to contamination. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;66(6):950-8. doi:10.1093/cid/cix957.PubMed
Doll M, Feldman M, Hartigan S, et al. Acceptability and necessity of training for optimal personal protective equipment use. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2017;38(2):226-9. doi:10.1017/ice.2016.252.PubMed
Tomas ME, Kundrapu S, Thota P, et al. Contamination of health care personnel during removal of personal protective equipment. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(12):1904-10. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.4535.PubMed
Bhoyrul B, Lecamwasam K, Wilkinson M, et al. A review of non-glove personal protective equipment-related occupational dermatoses reported to EPIDERM between 1993 and 2013. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;80(4):217-221. doi:10.1111/cod.13177.PubMed
Geier J, Lessmann H, Mahler V, Pohrt U, Uter W, Schnuch A. Occupational contact allergy caused by rubber gloves--nothing has changed. Contact Dermatitis. 2012;67(3):149-56. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2012.02139.x.PubMed
Herlihey TA, Gelmi S, Flewwelling CJ, et al. Personal protective equipment for infectious disease preparedness: a human factors evaluation. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2016;37(9):1022-8. doi:10.1017/ice.2016.124.PubMed
Tharion WJ, Potter AW, Duhamel CM, Karis AJ, Buller MJ, Hoyt RW. Real-time physiological monitoring while encapsulated in personal protective equipment. J Sport Hum Perf 2013; 1: 14–21. DOI: 10.12922/jshp.0030.2013. Journal
Warshaw EM, Schlarbaum JP, Silverberg JI, et al. Safety equipment: When protection becomes a problem. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81(2):130-2. doi:10.1111/cod.13254.PubMed
Yan Y, Chen H, Chen L, et al. Consensus of Chinese experts on protection of skin and mucous membrane barrier for health-care workers fighting against coronavirus disease 2019. Dermatol Ther. 2020;e13310. doi:10.1111/dth.13310.PubMed
Wattanakrai P, Taylor JS. Occupational and environmental acne. In: John SM, Johansen JD, Rustemeyer T, Elsner P, Maibach HI (eds). Kanerva’s Occupational Dermatology, 3rd edn, Cham (Switzerland): Springer, 2020: 435–59.
Alvino RT, Caughell CM. COVID-19 in the perioperative setting: applying a hierarchy of controls to prevent transmission. AORN J. 2021;113(2):147-64. doi:10.1002/aorn.13301. Journal
Verbeek JH, Rajamaki B, Ijaz S, et al. Personal protective equipment for preventing highly infectious diseases due to exposure to contaminated body fluids in healthcare staff. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;5:CD011621. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD011621.pub5. Journal
Hu K, Fan J, Li X, Gou X, Li X, Zhou X. The adverse skin reactions of health care workers using personal protective equipment for COVID-19. Medicine (Baltimore). 2020;99(24):e20603. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000020603. Journal