URGENT: Are CDC Ebola Guidelines 'Good Enough'?

Nurses COVID

Published

We now have two nurses who were infected with Ebola while caring for a patient. Although they were blamed for "breaching protocol," we know that's not the case now that reports of the deplorable conditions and lack of appropriate PPE and protocols has come to light.

Nurses allege staff worked with ebola patient 'without proper protective gear' | BreakingNews.ie

But even if CDC protocols and recommendations are followed in the wake of this disaster, the question is this:

Are they enough to protect nurses (and their families, and other patients in the hospital, and the public health)?

It sure doesn't seem like it. In fact, I feel confident in saying no, they're not. I've been doing some research, and I want to share my findings with my fellow nurses.

According to the World Health Organization, 4,493 people have died from Ebola, and 427 healthcare workers have been infected during patient care. 236 of them have died. For every 10 patients with Ebola, one nurse has been infected. And nearly half of them has died. Some of them did not have the appropriate PPE (like the nurses in Dallas). Some did.

Ebola is a Biosafety Level 4 pathogen -- the most severe category. The CDC has this to say about BSL-4 pathogens:

"The microbes in a BSL-4 lab are dangerous and exotic, posing a high risk of aerosol-transmitted infections. Infections caused by these microbes are frequently fatal and without treatment or vaccines. Two examples of microbes worked with in a BSL-4 laboratory include Ebola and Marburg viruses."

http://www.cdc.gov/training/quicklearns/biosafety/ (slide 10)

There is a HUGE discrepancy between safety guidelines issued by the CDC for healthcare workers and workers in research laboratories. Why should this be? Labs handle Ebola under controlled conditions. Nurses handle Ebola when it's being spewed out in projectile vomit and explosive diarrhea. But the guidelines for nurses don't come close to those for lab workers, which is outlined here for handling BSL-4 pathogens, including Ebola:

Laboratory practices

  • Change clothing before entering.
  • Shower upon exiting.
  • Decontaminate all materials before exiting.

Safety equipment

Facility construction

  • The laboratory is in a separate building or in an isolated and restricted zone of the building.
  • The laboratory has dedicated supply and exhaust air, as well as vacuum lines and decontamination systems.

http://www.cdc.gov/training/quicklearns/biosafety/ (slide 11)

Yet for nurses (and others in contact with a patient), the CDC only recommends an isolation gown, gloves, a surgical mask or respirator, and goggles or a face shield.

http://nsnbc.me/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/CDC_Ebola_Ebola-Guidelines.png

Why is this? It's the very same virus, the very unforgiving virus that kills 70% of those it infects, and in a horrifying way. There is no vaccine, and there is no cure. These are the reasons it is classified as a BLS-4 pathogen.

Yet the CDC keeps reassuring us that it's 'hard to catch' Ebola, and it's only spread through contact with body fluids. So why are those lab workers dressed like astronauts? Because Ebola is a very unforgiving virus that kills 70% of those it infects, and in a horrifying way. There is no vaccine, and there is no cure. Even if it's hard to catch, you don't want to catch it. That means every precaution must be taken.

And why do they say it poses a 'high risk of aerosol-transmitted infections' (link above), but then tell us it's only spread through direct contact?

Any pathogen can be aerosolized. Droplets form and hang in the air for as long as 90 minutes when a toilet is flushed, a patient sneezes or coughs, or during procedures likely to produce aerosolized droplets, such as intubation.

In speaking about Ebola transmission, Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota said this:

"Some scientists are urging health officials to acknowledge what they don't know. At a meeting on Ebola Tuesday, one infectious disease researcher told an audience at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore that scientists should get comfortable with uncertainty and be honest with the public about gaps in knowledge about Ebola.

"We're making this up as we go. We have to be mindful that we're making it up. One of the worst enemies we can have today is dogma."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/10/15/nurses-protest-ebola/17302987/

Even if it does spread only through direct contact, workers should use the maximum protection needed. Why? There is absolutely no room for second best or probably good enough.

"Ebola kills 50% to 90% of people who become infected, which is much higher than any other infection we are used to dealing with. The 2009 influenza pandemic killed less than 0.01% of those infected, and SARS killed 15%. The price of getting it wrong with flu guidelines might be a week in bed, but for Ebola it is far more likely to be death."

http://nsnbc.me/2014/10/15/nurses-becoming-infected-ebola/

Even if you use more and better PPE than the CDC recommends -- and you're an expert in using it -- you might not be safe:

"Dr Sheikh Hummar Khan was the leading viral haemorrhagic fever expert of Sierra Leone, who had already treated over 100 Ebola patients using full personal protective equipment when he died from Ebola.

"Personal protective equipment guidelines should not be based on presumed mode of transmission alone, but also on uncertainty around transmission, on the severity of the disease, on health worker factors, and on available treatments or preventions."

"Health authorities such as the US CDC are conveying certainty that Ebola cannot be transmitted by any means other than direct contact. But it's a very poorly studied infection compared with other diseases and the sum of the evidence shows significant uncertainty around transmission.

There is no scientific evidence to explain why health workers using personal protective equipment are becoming infected, and nor has there been a reasoned approach to trying to explain it.

Instead, the blame has been placed on the health workers for lapsing in personal protective equipment protocols."

"If MSF (Doctors Without Borders) has more comprehensive protocols on protective wear, it is hard to understand why Western countries are not heeding them."

http://nsnbc.me/2014/10/15/nurses-becoming-infected-ebola/

I strongly urge nurses to campaign for PPE and protocols at least on the level of that utilized by MSF. Don't accept anything less. You deserve it, your families deserve it, the public deserves it, and the other patients in the facility deserve it.

The people 'in charge' of this crisis have made enough mistakes. Please don't become one more of them.

Please watch this excellent video of how nurses at Emory protect themselves:

Nurses show how they prepare to treat Ebola patients

Specializes in RN, CHPN.
Do you have the same concern when caring for patients with Hepatitis C or HIV? Do you fear that they will suddenly change to airborne (aerosolized) transmission? If you don’t, what makes Ebola so special?

First of all, there is a difference between 'airborne' and 'aerosolized' transmission.

Airborne transmission occurs when bacteria or viruses travel on air currents over considerable distances. These droplets are loaded with infectious particles.

Infections that can spread by airborne transmission:

Anthrax (inhalational)

Chickenpox

Influenza

Smallpox

Measles

Tuberculosis

Rubella

Mumps...etc...

Aerosol (or droplet) transmission occurs when contagious droplets produced by the infected host are propelled a short distance and come into contact with another person's conjunctiva, mouth or nasal mucosa, or are inhaled. These droplets travel 3 to 6 feet. They can remain in the air for up to 90 minutes.

Aerosols (droplets) are produced by things like coughing, sneezing, projectile vomiting, flushing a toilet containing diarrhea, or aerosol-generating medical procedures like intubation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, bronchoscopy, open suctioning of respiratory tract (including trach care), and nebulizer therapy.

There IS as risk of aerosol transmission of Ebola. And because Ebola is such a deadly disease that has no treatment or cure, healthcare workers MUST protect themselves from potential aerosol transmission. Think about it -- you're working in a closed isolation room with a patient who may be producing aerosols. It's a concentrated environment.

There is still controversy surrounding how Ebola is transmitted.

"Personal protective equipment guidelines should not be based on presumed mode of transmission alone, but also on uncertainty around transmission, on the severity of the disease, on health worker factors, and on available treatments or preventions."

The CDC website says this about Ebola:

There are a small number of BSL-4 (Biosafety Level 4, the highest) labs in the United States and around the world. The microbes in a BSL-4 lab are dangerous and exotic, posing a high risk of aerosol-transmitted infections. Infections caused by these microbes are frequently fatal and without treatment or vaccines. Two examples of microbes worked with in a BSL-4 laboratory include Ebola and Marburg viruses.

In speaking about Ebola transmission, Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota said this:

"Some scientists are urging health officials to acknowledge what they don't know. At a meeting on Ebola Tuesday, one infectious disease researcher told an audience at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore that scientists should get comfortable with uncertainty and be honest with the public about gaps in knowledge about Ebola.

"We're making this up as we go. We have to be mindful that we're making it up. One of the worst enemies we can have today is dogma."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/10/15/nurses-protest-ebola/17302987/

"Some pathogens are limited in the cell type and location they infect. Influenza, for example, is generally restricted to respiratory epithelial cells, which explains why flu is primarily a respiratory infection and is most likely aerosol transmissible. HIV infects T-helper cells in the lymphoid tissues and is primarily a bloodborne pathogen with low probability for transmission via aerosols.

Ebola virus, on the other hand, is a broader-acting and more non-specific pathogen that can impede the proper functioning of macrophages and dendritic cells—immune response cells located throughout the epithelium. Epithelial tissues are found throughout the body, including in the respiratory tract. Ebola prevents these cells from carrying out their antiviral functions but does not interfere with the initial inflammatory response, which attracts additional cells to the infection site. The latter contribute to further dissemination of the virus and similar adverse consequences far beyond the initial infection site.

The potential for transmission via inhalation of aerosols, therefore, cannot be ruled out..."

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2014/09/commentary-health-workers-need-optimal-respiratory-protection-ebola

"University of Minnesota CIDRAP scientists are now warning both health care providers and the general public that surgical facemasks will not prevent the transmission of Ebola. According to the airborne Ebola report, medical workers must immediately be given full-hooded protective gear and powered air-purifying respirators."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/10/16/1336994/-Ebola-Is-Already-Airborne-Say-Two-Professors

Ebola isn't a disease to take chances with. It's very unforgiving virus that kills 70% of those it infects. There is no vaccine, and there is no cure. There are still unknowns about Ebola. Healthcare workers need to wear respiratory protection.

Specializes in CT ,ICU,CCU,Tele,ED,Hospice.
Based on how little we really know about ebola, I would refuse to care for a patient who has the virus, if that situation arose right now. We aren't prepared, and viruses mutate.

Although it has not been determined, I would bet that ebola has or will have airborne capabilities. More people will die and from this, the CDC will learn new information.

I work in Rhode Island .the DPH has already stated that any nurse who refuses to care for an Ebola pt will lose their nursing license.

I cannot figure out why anyone who knew they had been exposed to the Ebola virus would choose to travel at all until the 3 week incubation time is over. To me that seems extremely irresponsible, no matter if the CDC "gave permission" or not.

Specializes in geriatrics.

People are dying from ebola, and we know very little about the virus. You cannot compare ebola to other viruses. And sorry, my job is not worth the very real risk of death.

Specializes in geriatrics.

To continue....there are treatments for HIV and hepatitis. Until additional research is done, it's just not worth the risk, in my opinion.

I cannot figure out why anyone who knew they had been exposed to the Ebola virus would choose to travel at all until the 3 week incubation time is over. To me that seems extremely irresponsible, no matter if the CDC "gave permission" or not.

Human behavior isn't difficult to understand in any of these cases.

Duncan (patient 0), comes from an area of the world where the average annual income is 436 dollars. After saving up for and purchasing the means to see his family and his son; it's reasonable to infer that he would not have the means to make other arrangements. I'm personally inclined to think that he did not believe that he had contracted Ebola from the pregnant woman he assisted. If anything, I find it difficult to believe that he was a hateful and dangerous person based on that act of kindness alone.

Vinson had plans already to go and participate in the planning of her wedding. Seeing her fiancee following the stress of taking care of patient zero isn't an unreasonable thought or expectation either. Pham was not noted to be ill at the time she departed. She was not in the state during the time that the news broke. IIRC, according to family she became aware when her employer called her asking how she was doing. When she took her temperature and reported a low grade fever it was again, her supervisory staff and the CDC that informed her that she needed to return. And that it was ok to do so by flight. It was one day after she returned that her condition worsened. The vilification of this woman must stop.

The lab supervisor on the cruise didn't knowingly leave the US by boat with the foreknowledge that she could have been infected either. In fact, none of the hospital workers were even in the high risk category. That decision was made at the executive level. You cannot reasonably expect a person to cancel a cross continent trip, a wedding, a vacation of their own volition when they are essentially given clearance to continue with their daily lives. Most people will not regulate themselves in this manner. Most, if not nearly all people, will not self quarantine if they believe they have not been exposed. I mean, look at Dr. Nancy Snyderman over at NBC. She's a physician, and she just couldn't live without some food from her restaurant of choice. If there wasn't someone perceptive with a camera that spotted her...

There have been serious errors in judgement/leadership made on the executive level. The CDC, the hospital administration and high level managers were the ones who committed these errors. The culture of blaming the nurse or blaming the patient shouldn't be a factor in these discussions imo.

Consider what you knew about Ebola before these stories broke. Operating from the perspective of knowing what we know now, then isn't fruitful. These health care workers were largely ignorant of the virus, it's modes of transmission, and how to protect themselves from it while providing safe, effective care. What they knew of the virus was miniscule, practically hearsay. And what they were learning was passed to them primarily from those at the executive level. Their directives, however flawed in hindsight, were given to them by bodies that they trusted. At least, when they were able to be reached and provide answers.

Specializes in RN, CHPN.
You cannot reasonably expect a person to cancel a cross continent trip, a wedding, a vacation of their own volition when they are essentially given clearance to continue with their daily lives.

I agree with everything you said. The vilification must stop. I've read terrible things said about Mr. Duncan (patient 0) and I don't think he deserves it. He waited 2 DECADES to get a visa. He was coming here to see a son he hadn't laid eyes on in 19 years, and to get married. He got his ticket prior to his contact with the Ebola patient. He may not have believed he'd had enough contact to become infected.

Let's have some compassion and some basic understanding of human nature. None of the victims deserve to be vilified.

Specializes in Psych, LTC/SNF, Rehab, Corrections.

[=nuangel1;8176143]I work in Rhode Island .the DPH has already stated that any nurse who refuses to care for an Ebola pt will lose their nursing license.

Is that, like, a dare? LOL

... and everyone wonders why there's a "nurse shortage".

"We dont wanna provide the right resources to care for ebola pts but we're taking your license if you dont care for these ebola pts. Whats more important: the job or your life - and DONT choose the obvious answer!" LOL

Whatever. Ive got an aqua-colored, freshly shellac'd middle digit that the Rhode Island BON can twirl on.

Im a Texas nurse and I wish that Texas WOULD. The folks who tend to manage these facilities arent looking out for hlthcare professionals.

... and the CDC? Good God. Dr Friendlin was "dragged" to hell and back by the House panel, yesterday. Good.

Frankly, Im safe-r because I dont work in the hospital. Yet, if I did and knowing how much improvisation "generally" takes place and how the PPE situation "generally" works - I wouldn't touch any ebola pts.

It's unsafe. Im not alarmed or afraid. Im simply stating what im not going to do. *shrug*

The TXBON cld have this license if they want it. I shouldve stayed an accounting major, anyway.I am prior service for ten years, in two branches, and even then never dealt with so much bull in a profession.

Thank you for sharing this! The statistics are scary..

I agree with and personally use the second method listed under CDC guidelines for removing PPE...that's how I learned it in nursing school and it just makes more sense to me.

Specializes in Telemetry.

I keep hearing/reading comments about these people, vilifying them for traveling after being 'exposed'. Yet, in the case of the hospital staff, if they followed their hospital protocol while caring for the pt or handling his body fluids in the lab, why should they have considered themselves 'exposed'? Isn't the idea of proper usage of PPE to avoid exposure? I know protocols are changing but at that time, I don't see why either Nurse Vinson or the lab supervisor should have considered themselves exposed. So sorry for what these staff members are dealing with and wishing them the best.

Specializes in Pediatric ED;previous- adult Ortho/Neuro.
DWB has cared for 4,000 Ebola patients, and 16 have been infected.

The hospital in Texas had one Ebola patient, and 2 nurses were infected.

To compare the two, if that hospital cared for 4,000 patients, and their track record stayed the same, they would have 8,000 infected staff.

Dallas, we have a problem. A big problem.

seriously, why would we not take a page from the procedures of those who have been fighting this already for years, and have a track record like that?! We know common sense isn't always the strong suit of our higher-ups. :banghead:

Even so, I read somewhere that a decent majority of those infected (DWB) were while "out-n-about" so to speak, not while on duty/working directly with it. Also, none of those infected were until the current outbreak in W. Africa; they have gone years treating it in other places with no issues, but got out of control a bit quickly it seems in the African areas it is in currently, and being outside the isolation tents presents some risks I would presume.

Great info here peeps, thank you all. I am nervous, being in an ED, and in one of the cities that has treated a couple Ebola patients, I am just hoping they keep it in their containment unit! Our staff still has not had proper training, though I know there have been many meetings had the past couple weeks, and some informal training to don/doff the silly excuse of PPE recommended by CDC.

This whole situation is going to get worse before better, I fear. :(

Specializes in Pediatric ED;previous- adult Ortho/Neuro.
I keep hearing/reading comments about these people, vilifying them for traveling after being 'exposed'. Yet, in the case of the hospital staff, if they followed their hospital protocol while caring for the pt or handling his body fluids in the lab, why should they have considered themselves 'exposed'? Isn't the idea of proper usage of PPE to avoid exposure? I know protocols are changing but at that time, I don't see why either Nurse Vinson or the lab supervisor should have considered themselves exposed. So sorry for what these staff members are dealing with and wishing them the best.

The most recent nurse actually did communicate with CDC before flying when she realized she had a low grade fever, but since it was under their threshold of 100.4, they gave her the green light......

+ Add a Comment