Abstract
We are pleased to introduce this first special supplemental issue of Applied Biosafety that provides a showcase for international challenges and the progress made across the globe in biosafety and biosecurity. This issue has been timed to recognize ABSA International's upcoming Biosafety and Biosecurity Month in October 2021. Importantly, we would like to express our sincere appreciation to the following sponsors for helping to make this special supplemental issue possible with their generous funding as well as for their continued commitment to the enhancement and improvement of global biosafety and biosecurity: Arcoplast, Inc., Bio-Response Solutions, Inc., Elizabeth R Griffin Research Foundation, Germfree, Merrick & Company, MAXAIR Systems, Eagleson Institute, and PRI Bio.
To support SARS-CoV-2 risk management in a tertiary healthcare center diagnostic laboratory in Turkey, Zorbozan et al. conducted a step-wise risk analysis of procedures for working with diagnostic samples from the respiratory and intestinal tract. Risk control measures were prioritized according to urgency, feasibility, equipment delivery and installation time, and training availability. The process enabled them to reduce high-risk steps to a residual risk of acceptable levels. Baclig described the multistage assessment process employed in the Philippines for licensing diagnostic laboratories to operate COVID-19 testing regimens. The assessment scored the availability of safety equipment and trained personnel, appropriate design and facilities layout, supplies, the management system, safety controls, and proficiency testing.
Two articles focused on training and educational interventions to foster ownership in biosafety programs and improve awareness and practices. In a national project, Bota et al. sensitized health managers to biosafety before training and found managers had increased commitment to allocating funding for biosafety equipment, supplies, and healthcare worker training across Kenya. Mehta and Diwakar developed a targeted educational intervention program among laboratory technicians in a tertiary care hospital in central India and reported significant improvement in the knowledge, attitudes toward safety, and the safety practices of laboratory technicians with regard to universal work precautions after training sessions.
Numerous citations in the literature describe accidents involving students in the laboratory. Abu-Siniyeh and Al-Shehri randomly surveyed medical science students and laboratory workers at major hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Compared with laboratory workers, the majority of the undergraduates lacked safety awareness. Recommendations for enhancing laboratory safety awareness among students included better risk management in academic settings, providing a formal safety training curriculum, and promoting safety culture and ethics.
Vijayan and Smoker explored using Rasmussen's dynamic model of safety in a Singaporean medical school conducting biomedical research. Interviews with doctoral students, postdoctoral fellows, and research assistants revealed that the key goal was publishing scientific articles; this required researchers to maintain a high level of performance. This can create unacceptable workloads, which could lead to accidents. The tensions were managed in several ways; for example, performing mental risk assessments if deviation from an SOP was required and working in teams to plan and conduct the work. These behaviors enabled them to make decisions that balanced productivity, work quality, and personal safety. A more modern approach to safety training would entail incorporating aspects of resilient performance.
All articles in this issue of Applied Biosafety have been published electronically through Online Now and provide timely applied information that can be used by individuals and institutions for decision making during the COVID-19 pandemic and for strengthening biosafety in the future.