Disclosure and Fit Capability of the Filtering Facepiece Respirator

Applying the CDC Science Impact Framework to the results of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and the Bureau of Labor Statistics 2001 survey of respirator use and practices

During 2001-2002, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), at the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, collaborated with the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) at the United States Department of Labor to conduct a voluntary survey of U.S. employers regarding the use of respiratory protective devices. In 2003, the survey results were jointly published by NIOSH and BLS. This study highlights and evaluates the scientific impact of the 2001-2002 survey by using the Science Impact Framework which provides a historical tracking method with five domains of influence. The authors conducted interviews with original project management as well as a thorough document review and qualitative content analysis of published papers, books, presentations, and other relevant print media. A semi-structured and cross-vetted coding was applied across the five domains: Disseminating Science, Creating Awareness, Catalyzing Action, Effecting Change, and Shaping the Future. The 2001-2002 survey findings greatly enhanced understanding and awareness of respirator use in occupational settings within the United States. It also led to similar surveys in other countries, regulatory initiatives by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and Mine Safety and Health Administration, and ultimately to a renewed partnership between NIOSH and BLS to collect contemporary estimates of respirator use in the workplace within the United States.

Standards for Surgical Respirators and Masks: Relevance for Protecting Healthcare Workers and the Public During Pandemics

National standards for surgical respirators and masks are written and enforced to protect healthcare workers from particles and microorganisms such as Severe Acute Respriatory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In addition to the ability to filter particles (e.g. filtration efficiency, FE), the standards address breathability (e.g. differential pressure), how well the mask seals to a worker’s face (e.g. fit test), the level of protection from a fluid splash, and other factors. Standards used in the USA, European Union (EU), and China were compared with respect to testing methods and certification criteria. Although there are substantial similarities in standards for respirators, such as surgical N95, FFP2, and KN95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs), there are differences with respect to who performs that testing and fit-testing requirements that influence certification. There is greater variation in test methods between countries for surgical (USA) or medical (EU and China) masks than for FFRs. Surgical/medical masks can be certified to different levels of protection. The impact of the similarities and differences in testing methods and certification criteria on FFR and mask performance for protecting healthcare workers from SARS-CoV-2 are discussed, as well as the value of a new standard in the EU for testing fabrics for masks used by the public. Health and safety personnel in healthcare settings must understand the differences between standards so that they can select respirators and masks that provide appropriate protection for healthcare workers.