A tolerability assessment of new respiratory protective devices developed for health care personnel: A randomized simulated clinical study

Health Care Workers' Comfort Ratings for Elastomeric Half-Mask Respirators Versus N95® Filtering Facepiece Respirators During the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

Reusable elastomeric half-mask respirators (EHMR) are an alternative to address shortages of disposable respirators. While respirator discomfort has been noted as a barrier to adherence to wearing an N95 filtering facepiece respirator (FFR) among health care personnel (HCP), few have examined EHMR comfort while providing patient care, which was the purpose of this study.

METHOD

Among a cohort of 183 HCP, we prospectively examined how HCP rated EHMR tolerability using the Respirator Comfort, Wearing Experience, and Function Instrument (R-COMFI) questionnaire at Study Week 2 and Week 10. At the completion of the study (Week-12), HCP compared EHMR comfort with their prior N95 FFR use. Overall R-COMFI scores and three subscales (comfort, wear experience, and function) were examined as well as individual item scores.

FINDINGS

The HCP reported an improved overall R-COMFI score (lower score more favorable, 30.0 vs. 28.7/47, respectively) from Week 2 to Week 10. Many individual item scores improved or remained low over this period, except difficulty communicating with patients and coworkers. The overall R-COMFI scores for the EHMR were more favorable than for the N95 FFR (33.7 vs. 37.4, respectively), with a large proportion of workers indicating their perception that EHMR fit better, provided better protection, and they preferred to wear it in pandemic conditions compared with the N95 FFR.

CONCLUSION/APPLICATION TO PRACTICE

Findings suggest that the EHMR is a feasible respiratory protection device with respect to tolerance. EHMRs can be considered as a possible alternative to the N95 FFR in the health care setting. Future work is needed in the EHMR design to improve communication.

Health effects of filtering facepiece respirators: Research and clinical implications of comfort, thermal, skin, psychologic, and workplace effects

Filtering facepiece respirators (FFR's) such as N95s have become widely used in appropriate settings for personal respiratory protection and are increasingly used beyond workplace settings. Concerns about possible adverse effects have appeared in many publications, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic led to much more widespread use. This paper synthesizes known effects based upon review of publications in PubMed since 1995, addressing effects other than pulmonary and cardiovascular (reviewed elsewhere). Findings: (1) Subjective discomfort is very frequently reported; this includes general discomfort or organ-system-specific complaints such as respiratory, headache, dermatologic, and heat. Research methods are widely divergent, and we propose a taxonomy to classify such studies by methodology, study population (subjects, experimental vs. observational methodology, comparator, specificity, and timeframe) to facilitate synthesis. (2) Objective measures of increased heat and humidity within the mask are well documented. (3) Frequency and characteristics of dermatologic effects have been insufficiently evaluated. (4) Physical mask designs are varied, making generalizations challenging. (5) More studies of impact on work performance and communication are needed. (6) Studies of effect of FFR design and accompanying training materials on ease and consistency of use are needed.

Personalized 3D-printed frames to reduce leak from N95 filtering facepiece respirators: A prospective crossover trial in health care workers

Correctly fitting N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) have become increasingly important in health care throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the hypothesis that personalized 3D-printed frames could improve N95 FFRs quantitative fit test pass rates and test scores in health care workers (HCWs). HCWs were recruited at a tertiary hospital in Adelaide, Australia (ACTRN 12622000388718). A mobile iPhone camera + app was used to produce 3D scans of volunteers' faces, which were then imported into a software program to produce personalized virtual scaffolds suited to each user's face and their unique anatomical features. These virtual scaffolds were printed on a commercially available 3D printer, producing plastic (and then silicone-coated, biocompatible) frames that can be fitted inside existing hospital supply N95 FFR. The primary endpoint was improved pass rates on quantitative fit testing, comparing participants wearing an N95 FFR alone (control 1) with participants wearing the frame + N95 FFR (intervention 1). The secondary endpoint was the fit factor (FF) in these groups, and R-COMFI respirator comfort and tolerability survey scores. N = 66 HCWs were recruited. The use of intervention 1 increased overall fit test pass rates to 62/66 (93.8%), compared to 27/66 (40.9%) for controls. (OR for pFF pass 20.89 (95%CI: 6.77, 64.48, p < 0.001.) Average FF increased, with the use of intervention 1-179.0 (95%CI: 164.3,193.7), compared to 85.2 (95%CI: 70.4,100.0) with control 1. Pass rates and FF were improved with intervention 1 compared to control 1 for all stages of the fit-test: bending, talking, side-to-side, and up-down motion. (p < 0.001 all stages). Tolerability and comfort of the frame were evaluated with the validated R-COMFI respirator comfort score, showing improvement with the frame compared to N95 FFR alone (p = 0.006). Personalized 3D-printed face frames decrease leakage, improve fit testing pass rates and FF, and provide improved comfort compared to the N95 FFR alone. Personalized 3D-printed face frames represent a rapidly scalable new technology to decrease FFR leakage in HCW and potentially the wider population.

A framework for comparing N95 and elastomeric facepiece respirators on cost and function for healthcare use during a pandemic- A literature review

SARS-CoV-2 has posed implications for personal protective equipment supply. In this literature review we examine if elastomeric facepiece respirators (EFRs) are effective substitutes for N95 respirators through comparing their functionality and cost. We reviewed 30 articles which researched the advantages and disadvantages of each respirator. We compiled the reported results and found, among other things, that users favour N95 respirators for comfort but prefer EFRs for protection. EFRs are more cost effective when N95s are used as designed (single use) but mixed strategies minimize costs when N95s are reused (as practiced during shortages). Future research is needed on multicriteria analyses and to incorporate SARS-CoV-2 specific data to support future pandemic planning.

Designing better cloth masks: The effect of fabric and attachment-style on discomfort

Cloth masks are a tool for controlling community transmission during pandemics, as well as during other outbreak situations. However, cloth masks vary in their designs, and the consequences of this variability for their effectiveness as source control have received little attention, particularly in terms of user discomfort and problematic mask-wearing behaviors. In the present studies, common design parameters of cloth masks were systematically varied to ascertain their effect(s) on the subjective discomfort and frequency of problematic mask-wearing behaviors, which detract from the effectiveness of cloth masks as source control. The type of fabric comprising a mask (flannel or twill made of 100% cotton) and the attachment-style of a mask (i.e., ear loops or fabric ties) were varied in adults (18 to 65 years) and children (ages 6 to 11 years). For adults, ear loops were less comfortable than ties (p = .035) and were associated with greater face- (p = .005) and mask-touching (p = .001). Children, however, found flannel masks to be more breathable than twill masks (p = .007) but touched their masks more frequently when wearing a mask made of flannel than twill (p = .033). Common design parameters of cloth masks not only affect user discomfort and behavior but do so differently in adults and children. To improve the effectiveness of cloth masks as source control, the present studies highlight the importance of measuring the effect(s) of design decisions on user discomfort and behavior in different populations.

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.

Design considerations for protective mask development: A remote mask usability evaluation

The design of N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) continues to pose usability concerns for healthcare workers, which have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to develop a holistic model to guide mask design improvement. Dental students (n = 38) with experience wearing N95 FFRs participated in a randomized wear trial of three alternative protective masks. A mixed methods survey was used to examine usability of individual mask design components, the relationship of facial/head area to mask features, and overall mask design. Survey results indicated MNmask v1 demonstrated higher usability in seal confidence (M = 3.46), while MNmask v2 performed higher in satisfactory fit (M = 3.50). Design components of nose wire and head/neck bands were the most problematic, while conditions of skin irritation and tight/loose fit created an unfavorable wear experience. To consider healthcare workers' needs in improving the usability of protective masks, a model is presented to consider characteristics of fit, comfort, material, and design.

Physiological Impacts of Surgical Mask Coverage of Elastomeric Half-mask Respirator Exhalation Valves in Healthcare Workers

OBJECTIVES

Elastomeric half-mask respirator (EHMR) use in healthcare increased significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Concern for potential release of infectious aerosols from EHMR exhalation valves prompted recommendations to cover them with surgical masks (SMs), thereby improving source control. The physiological and subjective effects of wearing a SM over the exhalation valve of an EHMR, however, are unknown.

METHODS

Twelve healthy healthcare worker volunteers completed a 30-min series of simulated healthcare-related tasks, including resting, talking, walking, and bending, proning and supinating a weighted manikin, and performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This series recurred three times with different mask configurations-SM only, EHMR only, or EHMR with SM covering the exhalation valve. A transcutaneous sensor continuously measured carbon dioxide (tcPCO2), oxygen saturation (SpO2), and heart rate (HR) from each subject. Subjects scored their rates of perceived exertion (RPE) and levels of discomfort after each round. Physiological parameters and subjective scores were analyzed using mixed linear models with a fixed effect for mask type, activity, age, body mass index (BMI), and gender. Analysis also tested for interaction between mask type and activity.

RESULTS

Physiological parameters remained within normal ranges for all mask configurations but varied by task. Statistically significant but small decreases in mean tcPCO2 (37.17 versus 37.88 mmHg, P < 0.001) and SpO2 (97.74 versus 97.94%, P < 0.001) were associated with wearing EHMR with SM over the exhalation valve compared with EHMR alone. Mean HR did not differ between these mask configurations. Wearing SM only was associated with lower RPE and level of discomfort compared with EHMR, but these subjective scores did not differ when comparing EHMR with SM to EHMR only. Age, BMI, and gender had no significant effect on any outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Wearing a SM over an EHMR did not produce clinically significant changes in tcPCO2, SpO2, or HR compared with uncovered EHMR during healthcare-related tasks. Covered EHMR use also did not affect perceived exertion or discomfort compared with uncovered EHMR use. Covering the exhalation valve of an EHMR with a SM for source control purposes can be done safely.

Development and validation of the discomfort of cloth Masks-12 (DCM-12) scale

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of face masks by the public has helped to slow the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the community. Cloth masks have been recommended because of their effectiveness, availability, and reusability. Like other types of face masks, however, user discomfort while wearing cloth masks is thought to engender behaviors that limit the effectiveness of cloth masks as source control (e.g., adjusting or removing one's mask temporarily while in public). To design cloth masks that are more tolerable, a measurement instrument for assessing subjective user discomfort is needed. Across two studies, we identified and confirmed a two-dimensional factor structure underlying the discomfort of cloth masks - discomfort related to the breathability and discomfort related to the tightness of the mask against the face and head. Additionally, we provide replicable evidence that both factor-subscales predict the self-reported frequencies of problematic mask-wearing behaviors.

Performance and impact of disposable and reusable respirators for healthcare workers during pandemic respiratory disease: a rapid evidence review

OBJECTIVES

To synthesise evidence concerning the range of filtering respirators suitable for patient care and guide the selection and use of different respirator types.

DESIGN

Comparative analysis of international standards for respirators and rapid review of their performance and impact in healthcare.

DATA SOURCES

Websites of international standards organisations, Medline and Embase, hand-searching of references and citations.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies of healthcare workers (including students) using disposable or reusable respirators with a range of designs. We examined respirator performance, clinician adherence and performance, comfort and impact, and perceptions of use.

RESULTS

We included standards from eight authorities across Europe, North and South America, Asia and Australasia and 39 research studies. There were four main findings. First, international standards for respirators apply across workplace settings and are broadly comparable across jurisdictions. Second, effective and safe respirator use depends on proper fitting and fit testing. Third, all respirator types carry a burden to the user of discomfort and interference with communication which may limit their safe use over long periods; studies suggest that they have little impact on specific clinical skills in the short term but there is limited evidence on the impact of prolonged wearing. Finally, some clinical activities, particularly chest compressions, reduce the performance of filtering facepiece respirators.

CONCLUSION

A wide range of respirator types and models is available for use in patient care during respiratory pandemics. Careful consideration of performance and impact of respirators is needed to maximise protection of healthcare workers and minimise disruption to care.

Self-reported impact of respirator use on health care worker ability to perform patient care

In a study of 1,152 health care workers surveyed prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, most disagreed that respiratory protective equipment use interferes with patient care but reported that it would affect respirator use compliance if it did. A patient's fear reaction variably influenced self-reported health care worker compliance with respirator use. Strategies to improve protective equipment design may remove potential barriers to respirator use and allow better health care worker-patient relationships.

N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirator Use during Pregnancy: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

This study was aimed to systematically review the use of filtering facepiece respirators, such asN95 masks, during pregnancy.

STUDY DESIGN

A comprehensive search for primary literature using Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted from inception until April 2020 to find articles reporting outcomes of pregnant women using filtering facepiece respirator (FFR). Studies were selected if they included the use of FFR in pregnant women and reported an outcome of interest including physiologic changes (heart rate, respiratory rate, pulse oximetry, and fetal heart rate tracing) or subjective measures (thermal or exertional discomfort or fit). The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment scale was used to assess the risk of bias. The main outcome was to describe the physiologic changes in pregnant women compared with nonpregnant women. Due to the small number of studies and heterogeneity of reported outcomes a meta-analysis was not conducted. Results of the studies were synthesized into a summary of evidence table.

RESULTS

We identified four studies, three cohort studies and one crossover study, comprising 42 women using FFR during pregnancy. Risk of bias was judged to be low. Studies were consistent in showing no significant increase in maternal heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, and fetal heart rate between pregnant and nonpregnant women using N95 FFRs for short durations. Repeat fit testing was not supported for women gaining the recommended amount of weight during pregnancy. No evidence was found to reach conclusions about prolonged N95 FFR use in pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

Limited duration N95 FFR use during pregnancy is unlikely to impart risk to the pregnant women or her fetus.

KEY POINTS

· Limited N95 use unlikely to impart risk to pregnant woman/fetus.. · Prolonged N95 use in pregnancy is unstudied.. · Repeat fit testing in pregnancy likely unnecessary..