Annual N95 respirator fit-testing: an unnecessary burden on healthcare

US regulations mandate annual N95 mask fit testing for healthcare workers, but the optimal testing interval is unknown. In our study using data from 12,565 healthcare workers, the probability of survival free from fit-test failure after 3 years was 99.4%, suggesting that less frequent fit testing every 3 years would be safe.

Review of economic evaluations of mask and respirator use for protection against respiratory infection transmission

BACKGROUND

There has been increasing debate surrounding mask and respirator interventions to control respiratory infection transmission in both healthcare and community settings. As decision makers are considering the recommendations they should evaluate how to provide the most efficient protection strategies with minimum costs. The aim of this review is to identify and evaluate the existing economic evaluation literature in this area and to offer advice on how future evaluations on this topic should be conducted.

METHODS

We searched the Scopus database for all literature on economic evaluation of mask or respirator use to control respiratory infection transmission. Reference lists from the identified studies were also manually searched. Seven studies met our inclusion criteria from the initial 806 studies identified by the search strategy and our manual search.

RESULTS

Five studies considered interventions for seasonal and/or pandemic influenza, with one also considering SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome). The other two studies focussed on tuberculosis transmission control interventions. The settings and methodologies of the studies varied greatly. No low-middle income settings were identified. Only one of the reviewed studies cited clinical evidence to inform their mask/respirator intervention effectiveness parameters. Mask and respirator interventions were generally reported by the study authors to be cost saving or cost-effective when compared to no intervention or other control measures, however the evaluations had important limitations.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the large cost differential between masks and respirators, there is a need for more comprehensive economic evaluations to compare the relative costs and benefits of these interventions in situations and settings where alternative options are potentially applicable. There are at present insufficient well conducted cost-effectiveness studies to inform decision-makers on the value for money of alternative mask/respirator options.

Costs of Implementing and Maintaining a Tuberculin Skin Test Program in Hospitals and Health Departments

Objective:

To determine (1) the annual costs of implementing and maintaining tuberculin skin test (TST) programs at participating study sites, (2) the cost of the TST program per healthcare worker (HCW), and (3) the outcomes of the TST programs, including the proportion of HCWs with a documented TST conversion and the proportion who accepted and completed treatment for latent TB infection, before and after the implementation of staffTRAK-TB software (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA).

Design:

Cost analysis in which costs for salaries, training, supplies, radiography, and data analysis were collected for two 12-month periods (before and after the implementation of staffTRAK-TB).

Setting:

Four hospitals (two university and two city) and two health departments (one small county and one big city).

Results:

The annual cost of implementing and maintaining a TST program ranged from $66,564 to $332,728 for hospitals and $92,886 to $291,248 for health departments. The cost of the TST program per HCW ranged from $41 to $362 for hospitals and $176 to $264 for health departments.

Conclusions:

Costs associated with implementing and maintaining a TST program varied widely among the participating study sites, both before and after the implementation of staffTRAK-TB. Compliance with the TB infection control guidelines of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may require a substantial investment in personnel time, effort, and commitment.

Respirator-Fit Testing: Does It Ensure the Protection of Healthcare Workers Against Respirable Particles Carrying Pathogens?

Objective.

Respiratory protection programs, including fit testing of respirators, have been inconsistently implemented; evidence of their long-term efficacy is lacking. We undertook a study to determine the short- and long-term efficacy of training for fit testing of N95 respirators in both untrained and trained healthcare workers (HCWs).

Design.

Prospective observational cohort study.

Methods.

A group of at-risk, consenting HCWs not previously fit-tested for a respirator were provided with a standard fit-test protocol. Participants were evaluated after each of 3 phases, and 3 and 14 months afterward. A second group of previously fit-tested nurses was studied to assess the impact of regular respirator use on performance.

Results.

Of 43 untrained fit-tested HCWs followed for 14 months, 19 (44.2%) passed the initial fit test without having any specific instruction on respirator donning technique. After the initial test, subsequent instruction led to a pass for another 13 (30.2%) of the 43 HCWs, using their original respirators. The remainder required trying other types of respirators to acheive a proper fit. At 3 and 14 months' follow-up, failure rates of 53.5% (23 of 43 HCWs) and 34.9% (15 of 43 HCWs), respectively, were observed. Pass rates of 87.5%-100.0% were observed among regular users.

Conclusions.

Without any instruction, nearly 50% of the HCWs achieved an adequate facial seal with the most commonly used N95 respirator. Formal fit testing does not predict future adequacy of fit, unless frequent, routine use is made of the respirator. The utility of fit testing among infrequent users of N95 respirators is questionable.