N95 respirators: quantitative fit test pass rates and usability and comfort assessment by health care workers

Abstract

Objectives To compare the performance of four N95 respirator types with respect to quantitative fit test pass rate and health care worker‐rated usability and comfort. Design, setting, participants Health care workers who participated in the respiratory protection program at the Royal Melbourne Hospital, 1 October 2020 – 31 May 2021. Participants underwent quantitative N95 respirator fit testing (at least three of four types: semi‐rigid cup, flat‐fold cup, duckbill, and three‐panel flat‐fold types), and were invited to complete an online usability and comfort assessment for respirators for which their fit test results were passes. Main outcome measures Fit test pass rate, and user‐rated overall comfort and assessment ratings (five‐point Likert scales), by N95 respirator type. Results A total of 2161 health care workers underwent quantitative fit testing (women, 1586 [73.4%]; nurses, 1271 [58.8%]). The overall fit test pass rates were 65.0% for the semi‐rigid cup respirators (1029/1583 tests), 32.4% for the flat‐fold respirator (660/2035 tests), 59.2% for the duckbill respirators (2005/3387 tests), and 96.4% for the three‐panel flat‐fold respirator (1876/1946 tests). 378 health care workers completed the comfort and usability survey. Overall comfort and assessment ratings each differed by respirator group (P < 0.001); the median overall comfort (4; IQR, 3–4) and overall assessment values (4; IQR, 3–5) were highest for the three‐panel flat‐fold respirator and lowest for the semi‐rigid cup respirators (comfort: 2 [IQR, 1–3]; assessment: 2 [IQR, 2–3]). Conclusions The three‐panel flat‐fold N95 respirator outperformed the three alternative types with regard to fit test pass rate and user‐rated comfort and usability. To maximise respiratory protection for health care workers, these factors should be considered when making respirator procurement decisions.

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

“…Facial seal pressure to achieve an adequate protection factor varies between cone and flat fold devices 62,63 and therefore is likely to affect comfort. Comparison of types demonstrated superiority of the trifold flat‐panel type for both user symptoms and quantitative fit test pass rates 64 …”

“…Comparison of types demonstrated superiority of the trifold flat-panel type for both user symptoms and quantitative fit test pass rates. 64 In a study with direct comparison to other forms of PPE, using the straps is often a challenge using an N95. 22 Simple modifications such as adding small tabs to the mask may improve the ease of and compliance with proper donning and doffing.…”

Prospective comprehensive evaluation of an elastic-band beard cover for filtering facepiece respirators in healthcare workers

“…18 They have been shown to have very high QNFT pass rates and high comfort and usability ratings in healthcare workers. 19 A baseline QNFT assessment without the TheraBand (naked beard) was completed first, followed by 3 consecutive QFNTs wearing the TheraBand, for each make of the 2 FFRs. The participant was required to repeat the donning and doffing procedures (including the TheraBand) for each of the 3 QNFTs.…”

Face masks for respiratory viral illness prevention in healthcare settings: a concise systemic review and meta-analysis

“…But, N95 respirator masks are intended to be worn for protection against not just large droplets but also airborne nuclei ( 19 ). These respirators undergo stringent inspections in terms of tentative filtration measurements, breathing resistances, and fitting tests, before they can be certified for use as rPPE against aerosols ( 20 ).…”