Comparative analysis of personal protective equipment nonadherence detection: computer vision versus human observers.

OBJECTIVES

Human monitoring of personal protective equipment (PPE) adherence among healthcare providers has several limitations, including the need for additional personnel during staff shortages and decreased vigilance during prolonged tasks. To address these challenges, we developed an automated computer vision system for monitoring PPE adherence in healthcare settings. We assessed the system performance against human observers detecting nonadherence in a video surveillance experiment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The automated system was trained to detect 15 classes of eyewear, masks, gloves, and gowns using an object detector and tracker. To assess how the system performs compared to human observers in detecting nonadherence, we designed a video surveillance experiment under 2 conditions: variations in video durations (20, 40, and 60 seconds) and the number of individuals in the videos (3 versus 6). Twelve nurses participated as human observers. Performance was assessed based on the number of detections of nonadherence.

RESULTS

Human observers detected fewer instances of nonadherence than the system (parameter estimate -0.3, 95% CI -0.4 to -0.2, P < .001). Human observers detected more nonadherence during longer video durations (parameter estimate 0.7, 95% CI 0.4-1.0, P < .001). The system achieved a sensitivity of 0.86, specificity of 1, and Matthew's correlation coefficient of 0.82 for detecting PPE nonadherence.

DISCUSSION

An automated system simultaneously tracks multiple objects and individuals. The system performance is also independent of observation duration, an improvement over human monitoring.

CONCLUSION

The automated system presents a potential solution for scalable monitoring of hospital-wide infection control practices and improving PPE usage in healthcare settings.