The Effect of Gender and Respirator Brand on the Association of Respirator Fit with Facial Dimensions

Abstract

This study examined the association of facial dimensions with respirator fit considering the effect of gender and respirator brand. Forty-one subjects (20 white females and 21 white males) participated in the study. Each subject was measured for 12 facial dimensions using anthropometric sliding and spreading calipers and a steel measuring tape. Three quantitative fit tests were conducted with the same subject wearing one size of three different brands of half-mask respirators resulting in a total of nine fit tests. Linear mixed model analysis was used to model respirator fit as a function of gender and respirator brand while controlling for facial dimensions. Results indicated that the gender by respirator brand interaction was not statistically significant (p = 0.794), and there was no significant difference in respirator fit between males and females (p = 0.356). There was a significant difference in respirator fit among respirator brands (p < 0.001). Because correlations between facial dimensions and respirator fit differed across gender and respirator brand, six separate linear mixed models were fit to assess which facial dimensions most strongly relate to respirator fit using a "one variable at a step" backward elimination procedure. None of the 12 facial dimensions were significantly associated with respirator fit in all six models. However, bigonial breadth and menton-nasion length were significantly associated with respirator fit in five of the six models, and biectoorbitale breadth, bizygomatic breadth, and lip width were significantly associated with respirator fit in four of the six models. Although this study resulted in significant findings related to the correlation of respirator fit with menton-nasion length and lip width (the dimensions currently used to define the half-mask respirator test panel), other facial dimensions were also shown to be significantly associated with respirator fit. Based on these findings and findings from previous studies, it is suggested that other facial dimensions including bigonial breadth, biectoorbitale breadth, and bizygomatic breadth be considered when designing half-mask respirators, and that face length and lip width alone may not be appropriate in defining test groups whose fit is intended to be representative of worker populations.

The relationship between the filtering facepiece respirator fit and the facial anthropometric dimensions among Chinese people

“…Oestenstad RK et al conducted a quantitative fit test in white people and concluded that there were no significant differences in respirator fits between males and females 7) .…”

Factors Affecting the Location and Shape of Face Seal Leak Sites on Half-Mask Respirators

“…These conditions include variation of leakage among different brands of respirators, (11) variation of leakage among different fittings of a half-mask respirator on the same person, and variation of leakage among the exercises of a respirator fit test. (12) The purpose of this study was to determine if the distribution of respirator leak sites and shapes on half-mask respirators were affected by respirator brand, repetition of fit test, fit test exercise, or gender.…”

Laboratory Study to Assess Causative Factors Affecting Temporal Changes in Filtering Facepiece Respirator Fit: Part I – Pilot Study

“…Face length and face width in particular have been found to have significant correlation with fit. (5)(6)(7) Oestenstad and Perkins (7) also saw correlation with menton-subnasale length and nasal root breadth with fit. Zhuang et al (6) found significant correlations among fit and two facial dimensions: bigonial breadth and nose protrusion.…”

“…As described below, once eligible for participation, subjects were evaluated for several variables at baseline, and then at 2 weeks and 4 weeks after the initial visit. All volunteers received monetary (2)(3)(4)(5)(6), nasal root breadth (3)(4)(5), interpupillary breadth (8)(9), face width (10-11), nose breadth (12)(13)(14), bigonial breadth (15)(16)(17)(18)(19), lip length (16)(17)(18), nose length (4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17), nose protrusion (13)(14)(15)(16)(17), face length (4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)…”