Dataset Information

Evaluation of a New Workplace Protection Factor-Measuring Method for Filtering Facepiece Respirator.

ABSTRACT: Background:This study aims to assess whether the TSI PortaCount (Model 8020) is a measuring instrument comparable with the flame photometer. This would provide an indication for the suitability of the PortaCount for determining the workplace protection factor for particulate filtering facepiece respirators. Methods:The PortaCount (with and without the N95-Companion™) was compared with a stationary flame photometer from Moores (Wallisdown) Ltd (Type 1100), which is a measuring instrument used in the procedure for determining the total inward leakage of the particulate filtering facepiece respirator in the European Standard. Penetration levels of sodium chloride aerosol through sample respirators of two brands (A and B) were determined by the two measuring systems under laboratory conditions. For each brand, thirty-six measurements were conducted. The samples were split into groups according to their protection level, conditioning before testing, and aerosol concentration. The relationship between the gauged data from two measuring systems was determined. In addition, the particle size distribution inside the respirator and outside the respirator was documented. Linear regression analysis was used to calculate the association between the PortaCount (with and without the N95-Companion™) and the flame photometer. Results:A linear relationship was found between the raw data scaled with the PortaCount (without N95-Companion™) and the data detected by the flame photometer (R2 = 0.9704) under all test conditions. The distribution of particle size was found to be the same inside and outside the respirator in almost all cases. Conclusion:Based on the obtained data, the PortaCount may be applicable for the determination of workplace protection factor.

SUBMITTER: Sun C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7078565 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of a New Workplace Protection Factor-Measuring Method for Filtering Facepiece Respirator.

Sun Chenchen C Thelen Christoph C Sancho Sanz Iris I Wittmann Andreas A

Safety and health at work 20191113 1

<h4>Background</h4>This study aims to assess whether the TSI PortaCount (Model 8020) is a measuring instrument comparable with the flame photometer. This would provide an indication for the suitability of the PortaCount for determining the workplace protection factor for particulate filtering facepiece respirators.<h4>Methods</h4>The PortaCount (with and without the N95-Companion™) was compared with a stationary flame photometer from Moores (Wallisdown) Ltd (Type 1100), which is a measuring inst ...[more]

PMID: 32206375

Similar Datasets

Project description:Manufacturing sites, such as welding, casting, and asphalt production (fumes), generate vast numbers of ultrafine particles of <0.1 µm in size and submicron particles close to the ultrafine range (0.1-0.5 µm). Although cumulative masses of these particles are negligible in comparison to the larger particles, the health effects are more severe due to the higher penetration in the human lower respiratory tract, other body parts crossing the respiratory epithelial layers, and the larger surface area. This research investigates the effectiveness of two common commercially available N95 filtering facepieces and N95 pleated particulate respirator models against ultrafine and submicron particles. Two specific types of respirators, the N95 filtering facepiece and the N95 pleated particulate models, in both sealed and unsealed conditions to the manikin face, were tested at various commercial and academic manufacturing sites, a welding and foundry site, and an asphalt production plant. Two TSI Nanoscan SMPS nanoparticle counters were used simultaneously to collect data for particles of 10-420 nm in size from inside and outside of the respirators. While one of them represented the workplace exposure levels, the other one accounted for the exposure upon filtration through the respiratory surfaces. The results showed the particles generated by these manufacturing operations were mostly within the range of from 40 to 200 nm. Results also indicated that while the percentage of filtration levels varied based on the particle size, it remained mostly within the desired protection level of 95% for both of the N95 respirator models in sealed conditions and even for the N95 pleated particulate model in the unsealed condition. However, in the case of the N95 filtering facepiece model, unsealed respirators showed that the percentage of penetration was very high, decreasing the protection levels to 60% in some cases. Although the number of workplace airborne particle levels varied considerably, the filtration percentages were relatively consistent.

Project description:BackgroundThe design of personal protective equipment (PPE) may affect well-being and clinical work. PPE as an integrated item may improve usability and increase adherence by healthcare professionals. Human factors design and safety may reduce occupational-acquired diseases. As an integrated PPE, a lightweight protective air-purifying respirator (L-PAPR) could be used during health procedures where healthcare professionals are exposed to airborne pathogens. The human factors affecting the implementation of alternative PPE such as L-PAPR have not been thoroughly studied. The population of interest is health care professionals, the intervention is the performance by PPE during tasks across the three PPE types 1.) N95 respirators and face shields, 2.)traditional powered air-purifying respirator(PAPR), and 3.) L-PAPR. The outcomes are user error, communications, safety, and end-user preferences.ObjectiveThis study will assess whether the L-PAPR improves health care professionals' comfort in terms of perceived workload and physical and psychological burden during direct patient care when compared with the traditional PAPR or N95 and face shield. This study also aims to evaluate human factors during the comparison of the use of L-PAPR with a combination of N95 respirators plus face shields or the traditional PAPRs.MethodsThis is an interventional randomized crossover quality improvement feasibility study consisting of a 3-site simulation phase with 10 participants per site and subsequent field testing in 2 sites with 30 participants at each site. The 3 types of respiratory PPE will be compared across medical tasks and while donning and doffing. We will evaluate the user's perceived workload, usability, usage errors, and heart rate. We will conduct semistructured interviews to identify barriers and enablers to implementation across each PPE type over a single continuous wear episode and observe interpersonal communications across conditions and PPE types.ResultsWe expect the research may highlight communication challenges and differences in usability and convenience across PPE types along with error frequency during PPE use across PPE types, tasks, and time.ConclusionsThe design of PPE may affect overall well-being and hinder or facilitate clinical work. Combining 2 pieces of PPE into a single integrated item may improve usability and reduce occupational-acquired diseases. The human factors affecting the implementation of an alternative PPE such as L-PAPR or PAPR have not been thoroughly studied.International registered report identifier (irrid)PRR1-10.2196/36549.

Project description:A respirator fit test panel (RFTP) with facial size distribution representative of intended users is essential to the evaluation of respirator fit for new models of respirators. In this study an anthropometric survey was conducted among youths representing respirator users in mid-Taiwan to characterize head-and-face dimensions key to RFTPs for application to small-to-medium facial features. The participants were fit-tested for three N95 masks of different facepiece design and the results compared to facial size distribution specified in the RFTPs of bivariate and principal component analysis design developed in this study to realize the influence of facial characteristics to respirator fit in relation to facepiece design. Nineteen dimensions were measured for 206 participants. In fit testing the qualitative fit test (QLFT) procedures prescribed by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration were adopted. As the results show, the bizygomatic breadth of the male and female participants were 90.1 and 90.8% of their counterparts reported for the U.S. youths (P < 0.001), respectively. Compared to the bivariate distribution, the PCA design better accommodated variation in facial contours among different respirator user groups or populations, with the RFTPs reported in this study and from literature consistently covering over 92% of the participants. Overall, the facial fit of filtering facepieces increased with increasing facial dimensions. The total percentages of the tests wherein the final maneuver being completed was "Moving head up-and-down", "Talking" or "Bending over" in bivariate and PCA RFTPs were 13.3-61.9% and 22.9-52.8%, respectively. The respirators with a three-panel flat fold structured in the facepiece provided greater fit, particularly when the users moved heads. When the facial size distribution in a bivariate RFTP did not sufficiently represent petite facial size, the fit testing was inclined to overestimate the general fit, thus for small-to-medium facial dimensions a distinct RFTP should be considered.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of a New Workplace Protection Factor-Measuring Method for Filtering Facepiece Respirator.

Publications

Evaluation of a New Workplace Protection Factor-Measuring Method for Filtering Facepiece Respirator.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets