Search

Background: New elastomeric half-mask respirator (EHMR) models without exhalation valves (EVs) or with exhalation valve filters (EVFs) are facilitating expanded use in health settings to reduce workers' exposure to airborne hazards while acting as source control to prevent pathogen spread. The physical comfort of new models has not been assessed in comparison to previously used EHMRs with EVs., Methods: Researchers assessed 1,962 health care and emergency medical service personnels' self-reported adverse experiences from 2 cohorts while wearing EHMR models with EVs (cohort 1, n = 1,080) and without EVs or with EVFs (cohort 2, n = 882). Fisher exact test identified differences between the cohorts accounting for organizational factors when possible., Results: Cohort 1 respondents experienced communication challenges and discomfort when wearing the EHMR > 1 hour statistically significantly more often than cohort 2. Cohort 2 respondents reported statistically significantly more instances of difficulty breathing, moisture buildup, being uncomfortable to wear < 1 hour, and being uncomfortably warm., Conclusions: Discomfort is prevalent among end users and more often among those wearing EHMRs without an EV/with an EVF. As EHMR research and development advances, prevalence in use may increase for emergency and routine situations. Organizations may not only need guidance about respirator selection but also model-specific selection., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: During shortages, elastomeric half-mask respirators (EHMRs) are an alternative to reusing N95 filtering facepiece respirators but require between-use disinfection. The objectives of this study were to (a) measure microbial reductions on EHMR surfaces under laboratory conditions by a standardized procedure using wipes impregnated with health care disinfectants and to (b) measure microbial reductions on EHMRs disinfected by volunteer health care providers., Method: We inoculated EHMR (Honeywell model RU8500) surfaces with Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Bacillus atrophaeus spores, and bacteriophages MS2 and Φ6, and disinfected them using two wipes with hydrogen peroxide (HP), alcohols, and quaternary ammonium compounds (QACs). Then, we randomized 54 volunteer subjects into three groups (Group 1: two wipes with instructions, Group 2: five wipes with instructions, Group 3: no instructions or set number of wipes) and used 0.5% HP wipes without precleaning on EHMRs inoculated with Raoultella terrigena and MS2., Findings: The laboratory study demonstrated that all organisms achieved at least 4 log 10 median reductions (HP>QAC/alcohol>QAC>QAC/saline). Pseudomonas was highly susceptible to HP and QAC/alcohol and Φ6 to all disinfectants. MS2 reduction was highest using HP and lowest using QAC/saline. Bacillus was least susceptible. The volunteer study showed a 3 to 4 log 10 average reductions of bacteria and virus; Raoultella reductions were greater than MS2, with variability within and between subjects. Conclusions : HP disinfectant wipes used in laboratory and by volunteers reduce bacteria and viruses on EHMRs by 3 to 4 log 10 on average., Implications for Practice: Commercially available hospital disinfectant wipes reduce bacteria and viruses on EHMRs and can fill the need for between-use disinfection. HP and combination QAC/alcohol have the greatest efficacy under our test conditions., Competing Interests: Conflict of InterestThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: During public health emergencies, demand for N95 filtering facepiece respirators (N95 FFRs) can outpace supply. Elastomeric half-mask respirators (EHMRs) are a potential alternative that are reusable and provide the same or higher levels of protection. This study sought to examine the practical aspects of EHMR use among health care personnel (HCP)., Methods: Between September and December 2021, 183 HCPs at 2 tertiary referral centers participated in this 3-month EHMR deployment, wearing the EHMR whenever respiratory protection was required according to hospital protocols (ie, when an N95 FFR would typically be worn) and responding to surveys about their experience., Results: Participants wore EHMRs typically 1 to 3 hours per shift, reported disinfecting the respirator after 85% of the removals, and reported high confidence in using the EHMR following the study. EHMRs caused minimal interference with patient care tasks, though they did inhibit communication., Discussion: HCP who had not previously worn an EHMR were able to wear it as an alternative to an N95 FFR without much-reported interference with their job tasks and with high disinfection compliance., Conclusions: This study highlights the feasibility of the deployment of EHMRs during a public health emergency when an alternative respirator option is necessary., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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., Competing Interests: Conflict of InterestThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: Disposable N95 respirator shortages during the COVID-19 and 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemics highlighted the need for reusable alternatives, such as elastomeric half-mask respirators (EHMRs). Two US medical organizations deployed reusable EHMRs during the COVID-19 response. In addition to wipe-based disinfection following patient care episodes expected per local policies at both organizations, postshift centralized cleaning and disinfection (C&D) was expected at one site (A), permitting shared-pool EHMR use, and optional at the other (Site B), where EHMRs were issued to individuals. Using a survey, we evaluated disinfection practices reported by EHMR users and predictors of disinfection behaviors and perceptions., Methods: Surveys assessed EHMR disinfection practices, occupational characteristics, EHMR use frequency, training, and individual-issue versus shared-pool EHMR use., Results: Of 1080 EHMR users completing the survey, 76% reported that they disinfect the EHMR after each patient encounter, which was the expected practice at both sites. Increasing EHMR use, recall of disinfection training, and work in intensive care or emergency settings significantly influenced higher reporting of this practice. 36% of respondents reported using centralized C&D, although reporting was higher at the site (A) where this was expected (53%). Confidence in cleanliness of the EHMR following centralized C&D was not influenced by individual versus shared-pool EHMR issue., Conclusions: Most EHMR users reported adherence with expected post-care individual-based disinfection of EHMRs but did not necessarily use standardized, centralized C&D. Future efforts to limit reliance on behavior related to respirator disinfection may improve EHMR implementation in healthcare to avert dependence on single-use, disposable N95 respirators., (© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Availability of personal protective equipment (PPE) and its effective use may influence safety climate perceptions among health care personnel (HCP). It is unclear how health care organizations can leverage the effective use of respiratory protection to engage in continuous improvement of their safety climate, which can inform opportunities for employee education and engagement., Methods: After using an elastomeric half mask respirator (EHMR) as their primary form of respiratory protection for several months, 1,080 HCP provided feedback in an electronic survey about respiratory protection training, confidence in EHMR use, barriers during use, and perceived safety climate. Ordinal logistic regressions were used as nonlinear models to test relationships between these variables., Findings: We observed that an increase in user confidence ( p < .013), training content ( p < .001), training formats ( p < .001), and a decrease in EHMR barriers ( p < .001) were associated with a statistically significant increase in proactive safety climate. In the second model, an increase in user confidence ( p < .006) and training content ( p < .001), and a decrease in barriers ( p < .001), was associated with a statistically significant increase in compliant safety climate., Conclusions/application to Practice: HCP EHMR confidence was positively associated with safety climate perceptions, underscoring the value of competency building by respiratory protection leaders prior to implementation. Because fewer barriers experienced while using an EHMR were associated with a more positive perception of safety climate, it is important to first communicate with end users about potential barriers and, second, to continue research with end users and manufacturers to improve the design of EHMRs moving forward.

The assigned protection factor (APF) for quarter-facepiece respirators is currently 5, based on fit test data from the 1970s with models no longer commercially available. The goal of this project was to evaluate the respirator fit capability of a NIOSH-approved N95 quarter-facepiece elastomeric respirator with a gel-based facial seal design (Envo Mask by Sleepnet Corporation). Human subjects were recruited from healthcare and the general population to satisfy a 25-member NIOSH bivariate panel. Subjects were fit tested with a fast fit protocol using a TSI Portacount Model 8038 in the N95 mode. Second-by-second measures of fit were then collected while subjects performed a 30-min series of simulated healthcare activities. Subjects completed a short comfort questionnaire. The median (5 th , 95 th percentile) fit factor was 188 (48, 201). Simulated workplace protection factors (SWPFs) had a median (5 th , 95 th percentile) of 181 (94, 199) (data truncated at 200) and 570 (153, 1508) (non-truncated data). Subjects ranked inhalation and exhalation as "easy" with average scores of 5.0/6.0 and 5.2/6.0, respectively. The facepiece was ranked between slightly comfortable and comfortable (4.8/6.0) and the harness as comfortable (5.0/6.0). Most users agreed (5.2/6.0) that the mask was stable on their faces. The 5 th percentile SWPF of 95 supports an APF of at least 10 for this quarter-facepiece elastomeric respirator, similar to the APF for half-facepiece respirators. This study supports increasing the APF for quarter-facepiece respirators, a class that has been largely ignored by manufacturers for the past 40 years. A lightweight, low profile, reusable quarter-facepiece respirator is an effective option for healthcare and other worker protection during a pandemic and similar situations.

Objective: This study evaluated health care workers' (HCWs') knowledge and confidence in using elastomeric half-mask respirator (EHMR) attributes known to influence usage., Methods: Health care workers were surveyed regarding their EHMR donning and doffing experience. Respondents were categorized into competency categories based on their scores. Category differences were analyzed using χ 2 and multiple logistic regression., Results: Seventy-two percent showed high levels of EHMR donning and doffing knowledge and confidence (mastery); however, 21% had greater confidence than knowledge (misinformed). Respiratory therapists had greater odds of mastery than other HCWs ( P < 0.05), whereas those working in medical/surgical and pediatric units had greater odds of doubt than other HCWs ( P < 0.01)., Conclusions: Although most HCWs show high knowledge and confidence with EHMR use, strategies to confirm respirator use competency may ensure greater HCWs protection., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: Dr. Hines receives research funding to her institution from the Department of Defense, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and CleanSpace Technology, a respirator manufacturer for a different research study. One of her family members works as a trainer for a respirator manufacturer of a different respirator style than that described in the paper. Caitlin McClain is part of the team from NIOSH/NPPTL that contracted the lead author to gather data and take point on publications., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.)