Use of powered air-purifying respirator(PAPR) as part of protective equipment against SARS-CoV-2-a narrative review and critical appraisal of evidence

Self-Contamination Risk and Failure Modes During High-Level PPE Doffing: A Comparison of Two Powered Air Purifying Respirator (PAPR) Hoods: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Personal protective equipment (PPE) doffing protocols can reduce risks of pathogen self-contamination. Powered air purifying respirators (PAPRs) may increase these risks. This study compares viral contamination and errors during simulated doffing of single layer vs double layer hood PAPRs.

METHODS

Eight participants performed two simulations (video recorded for failure modes and effects analysis): one single-layer hood (laid over Tyvek suit), and one double-layer hood (top laid over and bottom tucked into suit). Hoods were contaminated with viruses. After doffing, inner gloves, face, hands, and scrubs were sampled.

RESULTS

Virus contaminated least one site in 6/8 single and 5/8 double layer simulations. Virus contaminated inner gloves in single (six participants, median 5.42×104 PFU) and double-layer (two participants, median 7.23×102 PFU) simulations, and hands of two participants in single-layer simulations. Single layer doffing had 13 failure modes; double had 31.

DISCUSSION

Double-layer doffing reduced inner glove contamination. The double-layer protocol may reduce glove-face shield contact but allow more opportunities for error. Double-layer doffing errors may less frequently lead to contamination than single-layer.

CONCLUSIONS

Contamination and failure modes may differ between double and single-layer doffing. Although inner glove contamination was reduced, double-layer doffing may need redesign to reduce failure modes and contamination.

Swallowing during provision of helmet ventilation: Review and provisional multidisciplinary guidance

Use of noninvasive ventilation provided by a helmet increased globally during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. This approach may reduce need for intubation and its associated clinical complications in critically ill patients. Use of helmet interface minimizes virus aerosolization while enabling verbal communication, oral feeding and coughing/expectoration of secretions during its administration. Although improved oral hydration is a recognized benefit of helmet NIV, relatively little is known about the safety and efficiency of swallowing during helmet NIV. Risk of aspiration is a key consideration given the fragile pulmonary status of critically ill patients requiring respiratory support, and therefore the decision to initiate oral intake is best made based on multidisciplinary input. We reviewed the current published evidence on NIV and its effects on upper airway physiology and swallowing function. We then presented a case example demonstrating preservation of swallowing performance with helmet NIV. Last, we offer provisional multidisciplinary guidance for clinical practice, and provide directions for future research.

Factors influencing nurses' compliance related to the use of personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic: A descriptive cross-sectional study

AIM

To determine how nurses' experiences with the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic affected their knowledge, awareness, and compliance related to the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic in South Korea.

DESIGN

A descriptive cross-sectional study.

METHODS

A total of 247 nurses in South Korea participated in this study between May 10 and 19, 2023. An online self-report questionnaire was used to collect data on demographic and occupational characteristics, COVID-19 experience, knowledge, awareness, and compliance related to the use of PPE. Factors affecting compliance were analysed using hierarchical multiple linear regression.

RESULTS

Mean age of the nurses was 31.92, and 94.3% were women. Most had a bachelor's degree or higher and the mean clinical experience as a nurse was 6.45 years. Knowledge of the use of PPE was 8.45 out of 10, awareness was 3.52 out of 5, and compliance was 4.28 out of 5. Knowledge and awareness were correlated with compliance related to PPE use. Awareness (β = 0.234, p < 0.001), knowledge (β = 0.218, p < 0.001), experience caring for COVID-19 patients (β = 0.234, p = 0.004), optional fourth dose vaccine (β = 0.150, p = 0.017), clinical experience (β = 0.140, p = 0.022), and COVID-19 infection control education (β = 0.115, p = 0.037) were found to have a significant impact on compliance.

CONCLUSION

During the COVID-19 pandemic, nurses' knowledge and awareness of PPE use was a crucial factor in compliance. factors such as clinical experience, experience in caring for COVID-19 patients, optional vaccination, and completion of COVID-19 education also influenced compliance. We hope that these factors can provide a basis for developing training programs for nurses to respond to future emerging infectious diseases.

A manikin-based assessment of loose-fitting powered air-purifying respirator performance at variable flow rates and work rates

Loose-fitting powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) are used in healthcare settings, although barriers to routine, everyday usage remain, including usability concerns and potential interference with work activities. Loose-fitting PAPRs are approved by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and must meet minimum performance requirements, including a minimum airflow requirement of 170 L/min. One course of action to address usability concerns is to allow for the use of PAPRs designed with reduced airflow rates. The primary objective of this study was to assess the effect of PAPR flow rate and user work rate on PAPR performance, using a manikin-based assessment method. PAPR performance was quantified using the "Manikin Fit Factor" (mFF), a ratio of the challenge aerosol concentration to the in-facepiece concentration. Flow rates from 50-215 L/min and low, moderate, and high work rates were tested. Two models of NIOSH Approved loose-fitting facepiece PAPRs were tested, both having an Occupational Safety and Health Administration Assigned Protection Factor (APF) or expected level of protection, of 25. A two-way analysis of variance with an effect size model was run for each PAPR model to analyze the effects of work rate and flow rate on PAPR performance. Flow rate and work rate were found to be significant variables impacting PAPR performance. At low and moderate work rates and flow rates below the NIOSH minimum of 170 L/min, mFF was greater than or equal to 250, which is 10 times the OSHA APF of 25 for loose-fitting facepiece PAPRs. At high work rates and flow rates below 170 L/min, mFF was not greater than or equal to 250. These results suggest that some loose-fitting facepiece PAPRs designed with a flow rate lower than the current NIOSH requirement of 170 L/min may provide respirator users with expected protection at low and moderate work rates. However, when used at high work rates, some loose-fitting facepiece PAPRs designed with lower flow rates may not provide the expected level of protection.

A Review of Filtration Performance of Protective Masks

Masks are essential and effective small protective devices used to protect the general public against infections such as COVID-19. However, available systematic reviews and summaries on the filtration performance of masks are lacking. Therefore, in order to investigate the filtration performance of masks, filtration mechanisms, mask characteristics, and the relationships between influencing factors and protective performance were first analyzed through mask evaluations. The summary of filtration mechanisms and mask characteristics provides readers with a clear and easy-to-understand theoretical cognition. Then, a detailed analysis of influencing factors and the relationships between the influencing factors and filtration performance is presented in. The influence of the aerosol size and type on filtration performance is nonlinear and nonconstant, and filtration efficiency decreases with an increase in the gas flow rate; moreover, fitness plays a decisive role in the protective effects of masks. It is recommended that the public should wear surgical masks to prevent COVID-19 infection in low-risk and non-densely populated areas. Future research should focus on fitness tests, and the formulation of standards should also be accelerated. This paper provides a systematic review that will be helpful for the design of masks and public health in the future.

Development of an emergency airway response system for COVID-19 at a tertiary care hospital in resource limited country

The ongoing coronavirus (COVID-19) infection causes severe respiratory dysfunction and has become an emergent issue for worldwide healthcare due to highly transmissible and contagious nature. Aerosol generating procedures such as tracheal intubation is of particularly high risk. This mandates some advice on processes and techniques required to protect staff and uniform approach during airway management. We hereby share our experience in development of an emergency response system to deal with COVID airway management at a frontline hospital which particularly consider the local demands and resources. This includes a change in working dynamics with 24/7 consultant coverage for emergent or urgent tracheal intubation of COVID patients at non-operating room locations. Other steps include prepackaging intubation baskets, availability of videolaryngoscope, standard personal protective equipment including powered air purifying respirator, and use of modified intubation checklist.

Scaling Biosafety Up During and Down After the COVID-19 Pandemic

Purpose

The aim of this work was to review and analyze changes to the practice of biosafety imposed by pandemics.

Methods

A narrative review of the COVID-19 pandemic that began in 2020 and prior pandemics from the perspective of a working virologist.

Results

By definition, pandemics, outbreaks, and other emergencies are transient phenomena. They manifest as waves of events that induce unforeseen needs and present unknown challenges. After a pandemic, the return to normality is as crucial as the scale-up during the exponential growth phase. The COVID-19 pandemic presents an example to study operational biosafety and biocontainment issues during community transmission of infectious agents with established pandemic potential, the propensity to induce severe disease, and the ability to disrupt aspects of human society.

Conclusions

Scaling down heightened biocontainment measures after a pandemic is as important as scaling up during a pandemic. The availability of preventive vaccines, and therapeutic drug regimens, should be considered in risk assessments for laboratory studies. There exists the need to preserve situational memory at the personal and institutional levels that can be served by professional societies.

Exploring healthcare workers' perspectives of video feedback for training in the use of powered air purifying respirators (PAPR) at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

With the advent of COVID-19, many healthcare workers (HWs) in Australia requested access to powered air purifying respirators (PAPR) for improved respiratory protection, comfort and visibility. The urgency of the response at our hospital required rapid deployment of innovative training to ensure the safe use of PAPRs, in particular, a video-feedback training option to prepare HWs for PAPR competency.

AIM

To explore the feasibility, acceptability, and utility of video-feedback in PAPR training and competency assessment.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 HWs, including clinicians from Intensive Care, Anaesthetics and Respiratory Medicine, at a large teaching hospital in Australia.

FINDINGS

Participants believed that the use of video-feedback in PAPR training was feasible, acceptable and useful. They described a variety of benefits to learning and retention, from a variety of ways in which they engaged with the personal video-feedback. Participants also described the impact of reviewing personalised practice footage, compared to generic footage of an ideal performance.

CONCLUSION

By conceptualising video-feedback using a pedagogical approach, this study contributes to knowledge around optimising methods for training HWs in PPE use, particularly when introducing a new and complex PPE device during an infectious disease outbreak.

Tolerability, User Acceptance and Preference for a Novel Reusable Respirator Among Healthcare Workers

BACKGROUND

The CleanSpace Technology Halo respirator combines a clear face mask and a powered air supply, without belts or hoses. Although providing higher protection than other respirators used in healthcare, user acceptance of this device has not been assessed with validated tools.

METHODS

We surveyed healthcare workers (HCWs) within a US medical system using Halo respirators in 2021. Subjects completed three surveys over eight weeks, which included the Respirator Comfort, Wearing Experience, and Function Instrument (R-COMFI), a validated tool to assess respirator tolerability. The survey included additional questions about user acceptability and respirator preference. Responses were evaluated for change over time and for significant predictors.

RESULTS

Of 113 HCWs who completed the initial survey (29% response rate), mean ± SD R-COMFI score was 9.1± 5.1, (scale 0-47, lower = more tolerable) and did not change over time (p = 0.42). Fewer years in healthcare significantly predicted better R-COMFI score (p=0.01). Many users preferred Halo in both usual care (45-52%) and care of patients with COVID-19 (60-64%).

DISCUSSION

Halo respirators received favorable tolerability scores by HCWs, who often preferred them, especially during care of patients with COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

Given demand for respirator use in healthcare, the innovative design provides higher protection than other respirators with a favorable user experience.

Application of tight-fitting half-facepiece breath-response powered air-purifying respirator for internal body cooling in occupational environment

In dust-generating scenarios in occupational environments, it is important to take measures to prevent not only pneumoconiosis, but also heatstroke. The aim of this study was to verify whether using a tight-fitting half-facepiece breath-response powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) in combination with a self-produced cooling device could abate the deep body temperature while performing activities. We conducted a crossover study involving 10 subjects. The subjects were subjected to three conditions: wearing a PAPR equipped with a cooling device, PAPR, or a replaceable particulate respirator. During the experiment, the rectal temperature of the subjects was measured, along with the temperature near the PAPR inlet in container with the cooling device when the PAPR equipped with the cooling device was worn. The subjects rested in a cold chamber set at a dry-bulb temperature of 28°C and relative humidity of 45% for 20 min. Then, they moved to a hot chamber set to a dry-bulb temperature of 36°C (with the same relative humidity) in 5 min and exercised on a cycle ergometer for 30 min. After that, the subjects moved to the cold chamber for 5 min and rested for 20 min. Notably, the air inhaled by the subjects wearing PAPR equipped with the cooling device was approximately 10°C cooler than the ambient air. Furthermore, 35 min after the initiation of the experiment (after the middle of the exercise period), the rectal temperature of the participants wearing the PAPR equipped with the cooling device was lower than of those wearing PAPR or replaceable particulate respirators (p <0.05). Thus, we could deduce that the self-produced cooling device was useful in abating deep body temperature. PAPR is useful for its potential applications in hot occupational environments and can save lives in working environments where heat stress can result in major medical complications.

New Zealand Emergency Department COVID-19 Preparedness: a cross-sectional survey and narrative view

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to assess the level of COVID-19 preparedness of emergency departments (EDs) in Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ) through the views of emergency medicine specialists working in district health boards around the country. Given the limited experience NZ hospitals have had with SARS-CoV-2, a comparison of current local practice with recent literature from other countries identifying known weaknesses may help prevent future healthcare worker infections in NZ.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of NZ emergency specialists in November 2020 to evaluate preparedness of engineering, administrative policy and personal protective equipment (PPE) use.

RESULTS

A total of 137 surveys were completed (32% response rate). More than 12% of emergency specialists surveyed reported no access to negative pressure rooms. N95 fit testing had not been performed in 15 (12%) of respondents. Most specialists (77%) work in EDs that cohort patients with COVID-19, about one-third (34%) do not use spotters during PPE doffing, and most (87%) do not have required space for physical distancing in non-patient areas. Initial PPE training, simulations and segregating patients were widespread but appear to be waning with persistent low SARS-CoV-2 prevalence. PPE shortages were not identified in NZ EDs, yet 13% of consultants do not plan to use respirators during aerosol-generating procedures on patients with COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

NZ emergency specialists identified significant gaps in COVID-19 preparedness, and they have a unique opportunity to translate lessons from other locations into local action. These data provide insight into weaknesses in hospital engineering, policy and PPE practice in advance of future SARS-CoV-2 endemic transmission.

Risk of Dehydration Due to Sweating While Wearing Personal 2 Protective Equipment in COVID-19 Clinical Care: A Pilot Study

Objective: The objectives of this study were (a) to determine the physical impact of the personal protective equipment (PPE) used in COVID-19 care, specifically the impact on the hydration state of the temperature and the comfort of the healthcare workers who use it, and (b) to show the high-fidelity simulated environment as an appropriate place to test the experimental designs to be developed in real environments for COVID-19. Background: All healthcare staff use full PPE in the care of COVID-19 patients. There are problems, such as excessive sweating, which have not been quantified thus far. Methods: A descriptive pilot design was used in a simulated high-fidelity setting. There was paired activity, with mild–moderate physical activity, between 45 and 60 min continuously, with the COVID-19 PPE. Sixteen intensive care nurses were selected. The before–after differential of weight, thirst, weight use of the PPE, body temperature, thermal body image, general and facial warmth sensation, and perspiration sensation were measured. Results: All subjects lost weight in the form of sweat with both PPEs during the simulation scenario, with a mean of 200 g (0.28% of initial weight), and increased thirst sensation. Body thermal image increased by 0.54 °C in people using the full COVID-19 PPE. Conclusions: The use of PPE in the management of critically ill COVID-19 patients generates weight loss related to excessive sweating. The weight loss shown in this pilot test is far from the clinical limits of dehydration. The use of ventilated PPE, such as PAPR, reduce the body temperature and heat sensation experienced by the users of it; at the same time, it improves the comfort of those who wear it. The simulated environment is a suitable place to develop the piloting of applicable research methodologies in future studies in a real environment.

Physiotherapy management for COVID-19 in the acute hospital setting and beyond: an update to clinical practice recommendations

This document provides an update to the recommendations for physiotherapy management for adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the acute hospital setting. It includes: physiotherapy workforce planning and preparation; a screening tool for determining requirement for physiotherapy; and recommendations for the use of physiotherapy treatments and personal protective equipment. New advice and recommendations are provided on: workload management; staff health, including vaccination; providing clinical education; personal protective equipment; interventions, including awake proning, mobilisation and rehabilitation in patients with hypoxaemia. Additionally, recommendations for recovery after COVID-19 have been added, including roles that physiotherapy can offer in the management of post-COVID syndrome. The updated guidelines are intended for use by physiotherapists and other relevant stakeholders caring for adult patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 in the acute care setting and beyond.

Impact of Personal Protective Equipment on Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Resuscitation in Coronavirus Pandemic

Background and Objectives: This retrospective study evaluated the clinical impact of enhanced personal protective equipment (PPE) on the clinical outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Moreover, by focusing on the use of a powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR), we investigated the medical personnel’s perceptions of wearing PAPR during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Materials and Methods: According to the arrival time at the emergency department, the patients were categorized into a conventional PPE group (1 August 2019 to 20 January 2020) and an enhanced PPE group (21 January 2020, to 31 August 2020). The primary outcomes of this analysis were the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) rate. Additionally, subjective perception of the medical staff regarding the effect of wearing enhanced PPE during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was evaluated by conducting a survey. Results: This study included 130 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients, with 73 and 57 patients in the conventional and enhanced PPE groups, respectively. The median time intervals to first intubation and to report the first arterial blood gas analysis results were longer in the enhanced PPE group than in the conventional PPE group (3 min vs. 2 min; p = 0.020 and 8 min vs. 3 min; p < 0.001, respectively). However, there were no significant differences in the ROSC rate (odds ratio (OR) = 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38–1.67; p = 0.542) and 1 month survival (OR 0.38, 95% CI: 0.07–2.10; p = 0.266) between the two groups. In total, 67 emergent department (ED) professionals responded to the questionnaire. Although a significant number of respondents experienced inconveniences with PAPR use, they agreed that PAPR was necessary during the CPR procedure for protection and reduction of infection transmission. Conclusion: The use of enhanced PPE, including PAPR, affected the performance of CPR to some extent but did not alter patient outcomes. PAPR use during the resuscitation of OHCA patients might positively impact the psychological stability of the medical staff.

Revised recommendations from the CSO-HNS taskforce on performance of tracheotomy during the COVID-19 pandemic - what a difference a year makes

Background

During the early part of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Canadian Society of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery (CSO-HNS) task force published recommendations on performance of tracheotomy. Since then, our understanding of the virus has evolved with ongoing intensive research efforts. New literature has helped us better understand various aspects including patient outcomes and health care worker (HCW) risks associated with tracheotomy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Accordingly, the task force has re-evaluated and revised some of the previous recommendations.

Main body

Based on recent evidence, a negative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) COVID-19 swab status is no longer the main deciding factor in the timing of tracheotomy. Instead, tracheotomy may be considered as soon as COVID-19 swab positive patients are greater than 20 days beyond initial symptoms and 2 weeks of mechanical ventilation. Furthermore, both open and percutaneous surgical techniques may be considered with both techniques showing similar safety and outcome profiles. Additional recommendations with discussion of current evidence are presented.

Conclusion

These revised recommendations apply new evidence in optimizing patient and health care system outcomes as well as minimizing risks of COVID-19 transmission during aerosol-generating tracheotomy procedures. As previously noted, additional evidence may lead to further evolution of these and other similar recommendations.

Graphical abstract

N95 respirator and surgical mask effectiveness against respiratory viral illnesses in the healthcare setting: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To examine the results, level of evidence, and methodologic quality of original studies regarding surgical mask effectiveness in minimizing viral respiratory illness transmission, and, in particular, the performance of the N95 respirator versus surgical mask.

METHODS

Meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines with use of PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library databases.

RESULTS

Eight studies (9164 participants) were included after screening 153 articles. Analyses showed statistically significant differences between N95 respirator versus surgical mask use to prevent influenza-like-illness (risk ratio [RR] = 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.68-0.94, P < 0.05), non-influenza respiratory viral infection (RR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.52-0.74, P < 0.05), respiratory viral infection (RR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.65-0.82, P < 0.05), severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) 1 and 2 virus infection (RR = 0.17, 95% CI = 0.06-0.49, P < 0.05), and laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infection (RR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.66-0.84, P < 0.05). Analyses did not indicate statistically significant results against laboratory-confirmed influenza (RR = 0.87, CI = 0.74-1.03, P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

N95 respirator use was associated with fewer viral infectious episodes for healthcare workers compared with surgical masks. The N95 respirator was most effective in reducing the risk of a viral infection in the hospital setting from the SARS-CoV 1 and 2 viruses compared to the other viruses included in this investigation. Methodologic quality, risk of biases, and small number of original studies indicate the necessity for further research to be performed, especially in front-line healthcare delivery settings.

[The first year of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic-impact on otorhinolaryngology]

BACKGROUND

The first year of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has already affected our public health care system to an enormous extent and will continue to do so in the future. Otorhinolaryngologists (ORLs) are suspected to be at high risk of infection, due to the high viral load in the mucosa of the upper airways. The current review evaluates the impact of the pandemic on ORLs' activities and assesses the risk infection.

METHODS

A selective literature research was conducted using relevant English and German terms for ORL, SARS-CoV‑2, risk, and infection at PubMed, medRxiv, and bioRxiv, as well as in the Deutsches Ärzteblatt and on the websites of the Robert Koch Institute and the Johns Hopkins University.

RESULTS

Protection recommendations for ORL include general hygiene measures and wearing KN95 masks for routine professional activities. When in contact with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, it is recommended to extend the personal protective equipment by eye protection, gloves, cap, and gown. International otorhinolaryngology societies have released guidelines for procedures (e.g., tracheostomy, sinus surgery), propagating personal protection for the surgical team and reduction of aerosols. Testing for SARS-CoV‑2 in patients and medical staff can contribute to reducing the risk of infection. Vaccination would provide some additional protection for ORLs and other health care professionals with increased exposure to aerosols. There is increasing evidence that ORLs are at a high risk of contracting SARS-CoV‑2.

CONCLUSION

Consequent personal protection, frequent testing of patients and health care professionals, and the promised SARS-CoV‑2 vaccinations may provide adequate protection for highly exposed persons.

Fit-testing of respiratory protective equipment in the UK during the initial response to the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Public Health England guidance stipulates the use of filtering facepiece (FFP3) masks for healthcare workers engaged in aerosol-generating procedures. Mask fit-testing of respiratory protective equipment is essential to protect healthcare workers from aerosolized particles.

Aim

To analyse the outcome of mask fit-testing across National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in the UK during the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Methods

Using the Freedom of Information Act, 137 NHS hospitals were approached on May 26^th, 2020 by an independent researcher to provide data on the outcome of fit-testing at each site.

Findings

Ninety-six hospitals responded to the request between May 26^th, 2020 to October 29^th, 2020. There was a total of 86 mask types used across 56 hospitals, 13 of which were used in at least 10% of these hospitals; the most frequently used was the FFP3M1863, used by 92.86% of hospitals. Overall fit-testing pass rates were provided by 32 hospitals with mean pass rate of 80.74%. The most successful masks, in terms of fit-test failure rates, were the Alpha Solway 3030V and the Alpha Solway S–3V (both reporting mean fit-test failures of 2%). Male- and female-specific pass and failure rates were provided by seven hospitals. Across the seven hospitals, 20.1% of men tested failed the fit-test for all masks used, whereas 19.9% of women tested failed the fit-test for all masks used. Failure rates were significantly higher in staff from Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic (BAME) backgrounds 644/2507 (25.69%) across four hospitals.

Conclusion

Twenty percent of healthcare workers tested during the first response to the pandemic failed fit-testing for masks. A small sample revealed that this was most prominent in staff from BAME backgrounds.