Challenges of Personal Protective Equipment Kits Encountered in Healthcare Sector and Environment Amidst Covid-19

IJEP 42(6): 730-737 : Vol. 42 Issue. 6 (June 2022)

Shilpi Agarwal1, Shailey Singhal1, Jyoti Upadhyay2 and Kanchan Deoli Bahukhandi3*

1. University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Department of Chemistry, Bidholi, Dehradun-248 007, Uttarakhand, India
2. University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Department of Health, Safety and Environment, School of Engineering, Bidholi, Dehradun-248 007, Uttarakhand, India
3. University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, School of Health Sciences, Bidholi, Dehradun-248 007, Uttarakhand, India


SARS COVID-19 pandemic has threatened the world at various levels resulting in human loss, economic loss and environmental loss. In order to prevent the further transmission of COVID-19, a number of protective measures have been recommended and adopted by people, namely use of sanitizers, goggles, aprons, face covering, gloves and personal protective equipment (PPE) kits. Use of PPE kits has been very effective for health workers, such as doctors, nurses and policemen, however, the associated challenges including aftereffects of using PPE kits cannot be ignored completely. Same situation is being faced globally as people are using a giant volume of PPE in order to protect themselves from COVID-19 pandemic and its excessive use is generating huge quantity of PPE waste. This waste is causing huge environmental degradation, namely contamination of water, air and soil quality. In this paper an attempt has been made to describe the impact of PPE kits on human beings and global environment due to improper disposal methods. It also highlights the skin and respiratory problems confronted by healthcare workers caused by the use of PPE kits for extended hours indicating its long term impact on healthy living. A sustainable way of disposal and management of PPE waste has also been described.


Personal protective equipment, Injury, Infection, Environment, Waste, Disposal


  1. Zhu, H., I. Wei and P. Niu. 2020. The novel Coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, China. Global Health Res. Policy. 5(1):1-3.
  2. Lin, P., et al. 2020. Adverse skin reaction among healthcare workers during the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak: A survey in Wuhan and its surrounding regions. British J. Dermatol., 183(1): 190-192.
  3. Cucinotta, D. and M. Vanelli. 2020. WHO declares COVID-19 a pandemic. Acta Bio-Medica: Atenei Parmensis. 91(1):157-160.
  4. Worldometer. 2021. Covid-19 coronavirus pandemic. Available at: virus/?utm_campaign-home Advegas1 ?#countries.
  5. WHO. 2020a. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak: Rights, roles and responsibilites of health workers, including key considerations for occupational safety and health. World Health Organization Interim Guidance. World Health Organization, Geneva.
  6. SHP. 2020. PPE: Complete guide to personal pro tective equipment. Available at: /ppe-personal-protective-equipment.
  7. Yu, H., et al. 2020. Reverse logistics network design for effective management of medical waste in epidemic outbreaks: Insights from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in Wuhan (China). Int. J. Env. Res. Public Helath. 17(5):1770.
  8. WHO. 2020b. Shortage of personal protective equipment endangering health workers worldwide. World Health Organization, Geneva.
  9. Joseph, J.P. 2020. India COVID-19: Online survey shows not all is well on PPE. Sci. wire. Available at: https://science.the
  10. Lee, E., et al. 2020. Plastic bags as personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic: Between the devil and the deep blue sea. J. Emergency Medicine. 58(5):821-823.
  11. Booth, J. 2020. Survey highlights inadequate supply of PPE to front-line workers by hospitals. Dental tribune. Available at: com/news/survey-highlights-inadequate-supply-of-ppe-to-front-line-workers-by-hospitals/.
  12. Zhou, N.Y., et al. 2020. Prevention and treatment of skin damage caused by personal protective equipment: Experience of the first-line clinicians treating 2019-nCoV infection. Int. J. Dermatol. Venereol. DOI: 10.1097 /ID90000000000000085.
  13. Kissin, Y. 2008. Alkene polymerization reactions with transition metal catalysts (1st edn). Studies Surface Sci. Calalysis. 173: 1-592.
  14. Hoff, R. and R.I. Mathers. 2010. Handbook of transition metal polymerization catalysts (2nd edn). John Wiley and Sons.
  15. Moore, E.P. 1996. Polypropylene handbook: Poly merization, characterization, properties, processing applications. Hanser Publishers.
  16. Krishna, T. 2020. Life inside the PPE: No food, no water and no loo break for atleast 6-8 hr. The Print. Available at:
  17. Smith, J.D., et al. 2016. Effectiveness of N95 respirations versus surgical masks in protecting healthcare workers from acute respiratory infection: A systemic review and meta-analysis. Cmaj. 88(8):567-574.
  18. European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, NPIAP and PPPIA. 2019. Prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers injuries. Clinical practice guidelines. The international guidelines.
  19. Kantor, J. 2020. Behavioural considerations and impact on personal protective equipment use: Early lessons from the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. J. American Academy Dermatol., 82(5): 1087-1088.
  20. FOO, C.C.I., et al. 2006. Adverse skin reaction to personal protective equipment against severe acute respiratory syndrome-A descri study in Singapore. Contact Dermatitis. 55(5):291-294.
  21. Pailler-Mattei, C., et al. 2007. Contribution of stratum corneum indetermining bio-tribological properties of the human skin. Wear. 263 (7-12):1038-1043.
  22. Jiang, Q., et al. 2020. The prevalence, characteristics and prevention status of skin injury caused by personal protective equipment among medical staff in fighting COVID-19: A multicenter, cross-sectional study. Adv.Wound Care. 9(7): 357-364.
  23. Noble, A. 2020. What working on the frontlines of COVID-19 does in your skin. Allure. Available at:
  24. Johnson, A.T. 2016. Respirator masks protect health but impact performance: A review. J. Biol. Eng., 10(1):1-12.
  25. Li, Y., et al. 2005. Effect of wearing N95 and surgical facemasks on heart rate, thermal stress and subjective sensations. Int. Arch. Occup. Env. Health. 78(6):501-509.
  26. Vidua, R.K., et al. 2020. Problems arising from PPE when worn for long periods. Medico Legal J., 88(1 suppl):47-49.
  27. Ham, W.H.W., et al. 2016. Pressure ulcers, indentation marks and pain from cervical spine immobilization with extriction collars and headblocks: An observational study. Injury. 47(9):1924-1931.
  28. Otto, M.A. 2020. COVID-19 PPE-related skin effects described in survey of Chinese doctors, nurses. The Hospitalist. Avaiable at: d-19-ppe-related-skin-effects-described-survey.
  29. Corbum, J., et al. 2020. Slum health: Arresting COVID-19 and improving well-being in urban informal settlements. J. Urban Health. 97(3): 348-357.
  30. Klemes, J.J., et al. Minimising the present and future plastic waste, energy and environmental footprints related to COVID-19. Renew. Sustain. Energy Reviews. 127:109883.
  31. Plastic Europe. 2019. Plastics the facts 2019. Available at: https://www. /9715/7129/9584/FINAL_web_version_plastics_the_facts2019_14102019.pdf.
  32. Hahladakis, J.N., et al. 2018. An overview of chemical additives present in plastics: Migration, release, fate and recycling. J. Hazard. Mater., 344:179-199.
  33. Heidari, M., P.P. Garnaik and A. Dutta. 2019. The valourization of plastic via thermal means: Industrial scale combustion methods. In Plastics to energy. Ed S.M. Al-Salem. William Andrew Publishing. pp 295-312.
  34. Frias, J. and R. Nash. 2019. Microplastics: Finding a consensus on the definition. Marine Poll. Bull., 138:145-147.
  35. Jambeck, J.R., et al. 2015. Marine pollution: Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Sci., 347 (6223):768-771.
  36. Sharma, H.B., et al. 2020. Challenges, opportunities and innovations for effective solid waste management during post COVID-19 pandemic. Resour. Conser. Recycl., 162:105052.
  37. Abhimanyu, C. 2020. Fighting from the bottom, India’s sanitation workers are also frontline workers battling Covid. The Indian Express.
  38. Fletcher, C. 2020. What happens to waste PPE during the coronavirus pandemic. Conser., 12(5).
  39. Sharma, N., et al. 2020. Personal protective equipment challenges and strategies to combat COVID-19 in India: A narrative review. J. Health Manage., 22(2):157-168.
  40. DRDO. 2020. Critical equipment and technologies developed by Defence Research and Development Organization for combating COVID-19 pandemic. Defence Research and Development Organization, New Delhi. Available at: 2. pdf.
  41. Arellano-Cotrina, J.J., et al. 2020. Effectiveness and recommendation for the use of dental masks in the prevention of COVID-19: A literature review. Disaster medicine Public health preparedness. 17: 1-6.
  42. Park, C. Y., K. Kim and S. Roth. 2020. Global shortage of personal protective equipment amid COVID-19: Supply chains, bottlenecks and policy implications. Asian Develop. Bank.
  43. Fengs, S., et al. 2020. Rational use of face masks in the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet Respiratory medicine. 8(5):434-436.
  44. Bowden, B. 2020. What happens to used personal protective equipment? Wilconsin Public Radio. Available at: protective-equipment.
  45. Kumar, C. 2020. Researchers look to make the best of PPE waste. The Hindustan Times. Avaiable at:
  46. Bureau, O. 2020. How can discarded PPE kits, masks be recycled and gainfully used? Disha Bytes. Avaiable at:
  47. Honus, S., et al. 2018. Pyrolysis gases produced from individual and mixed PE, PP, PS, PVC and PET-Part I: Production and physical properties. Fuel. 221:346-360.
  48. Scheirs, J. and W. Kaminsky. 2006. Feedstock recyling and pyrolysis of waste plastics. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, UK.
  49. WIliams, P.T. and E. Slaney. 2007. Analysis of products from the pyrolysis and liquefaction of single plastics and waste plastic mixtures. Resour. Conser. Recycling. 51(4):754-769.
  50. Jie, G., L. Ying-Shun and L. Mai-Xi. 2008. Product characterization of waste printed circuit board by pyrolysis. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis. 83(2):185-189.
  51. Vivero, L., et al. 2005. Effects of plastic wastes on coal pyrolysis behaviour and the structure of semicokes. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis. 74(1-2):327-336.
  52. Miskolizi, N., et al. 2009. Fuels by pyrolysis of waste plastics from agricultural and packaging sectors in a pilot scale reactor. Fuel Processing Tech., 90(7-8):1032-1040.
  53. Cit, I., et al. 2010. Comparative pyrolysis of polyolefins (PP and LDPE) and PET. Polymer Bull., 64(8):817-834.
  54. Regnier, N. and B. Mortaigne. 1995. Analysis by pyrolysis/gas chromatography/mass/spectrometry of glass fibre/vinyl ester thermal degradation prodcuts. Polymer Degrad. Stability. 49(3):419-428.
  55. Blazso, M. 2006. Compostion of liquid fuels derived from the pyrolysis of plastics. In Feedstock recycling and pyrolysis of waste plastics: Converting waste plastic into diesel and other fuels. Ed J. Scheirs and W. Kamin Sky. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, UK. pp 315-344.
  56. MeCusker, L.B., F. Liebau and G. Engelhardt. 2001. Nomenclature of structural and compositional character-ristics of ordered microporous and mesoporous materials with inorganic hosts (IUPAC recommend-dations 2001). Pure Appl. Chem., 73(2):381-394.
  57. Murata, K., K. Sato and Y. Sakata. 2004. Effect of pressure on thermal degradation of polyethylene. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis. 71(2):569-589.
  58. Ziang, Y., et al. 2015. A biocatalytic approach towards sustainable furanic-aliphatic polyesters. Polymer Chem., 6(29):5198-5211.
  59. Challen, B. and R. Baranescu. 1999. Diesel engine reference book. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
  60. Bains, M., et al. 1994. The compatibility of linear low density polyethylene polypropylene blends: Viscosity ratio plots. Polymer Eng. Sci., 34(16):1260-1268.
  61. Ahmad, I., et al. 2015. Pyrolysis study of polypropylene and polyethylene into premium oil products. Int. J. Green Energy. 12(7):663-671.