Effectiveness of fit testing versus fit checking for healthcare workers respiratory protective equipment: A systematic review

Objectives

Respiratory protection is critical in healthcare to minimise the risk of airborne infections for healthcare workers (HCWs). It emphasizes the use of proper fitting of particulate filter respirators and equivalent respiratory protective equipment (RPE) to ensure a good facial seal. The systematic review aimed to compare the effectiveness of fit testing and fit checking for HCWs' respiratory protective equipment.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature exploring RPE for HCWs to determine the effectiveness of fit-testing versus fit-checking from January 2003 to April 2022 was identified using CINAHL Complete via EBSCO Host, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, and MEDLINE via Ovid electronic databases, and grey literature. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020213968).

Results

Of the 561 articles identified in the search, 25 articles (22 quantitative studies and three guidelines) were included in this review. Overall, these studies suggest fit-testing as a method that is more effective, widely adopted, and reliable in assessing the effectiveness of RPE; however, a respiratory program should include both fit-testing and fit-checking to maximise effectiveness of the RPE. The COVID-19 epidemic highlighted a lack of knowledge among HCWs regarding fit-checking and fit-testing, and relevant education increased the effectiveness of respiratory equipment protection.

Conclusion

It is imperative that both fit-testing and fit-checking is implemented in order to ensure HCW safety. It is recommended to integrate education, fit-testing and fit-checking into a comprehensive respiratory protective program run by trained fit-testers. There is also a need for practical testing methods that incorporate the clinical environment.

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.