Search

Abstract Background and purpose COVID-19 pandemic led to wide-spread use of face-masks, respirators and other personal protective equipment (PPE) by healthcare workers. Various symptoms attributed to the use of PPE are believed to be, at least in part, due to elevated carbon-dioxide (CO2) levels. We evaluated concentrations of CO2 under various PPE. Methods In a prospective observational study on healthy volunteers, CO2 levels were measured during regular breathing while donning 1) no mask, 2) JustAir® powered air purifying respirator (PAPR), 3) KN95 respirator, and 4) valved-respirator. Serial CO2 measurements were taken with a nasal canula at a frequency of 1-Hz for 15-min for each PPE configuration to evaluate whether National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) limits were breached. Results The study included 11 healthy volunteers, median age 32 years (range 16–54) and 6 (55%) men. Percent mean (SD) changes in CO2 values for no mask, JustAir® PAPR, KN95 respirator and valve respirator were 0.26 (0.12), 0.59 (0.097), 2.6 (0.14) and 2.4 (0.59), respectively. Use of face masks (KN95 and valved-respirator) resulted in significant increases in CO2 concentrations, which exceeded the 8-h NIOSH exposure threshold limit value-weighted average (TLV-TWA). However, the increases in CO2 concentrations did not breach short-term (15-min) limits. Importantly, these levels were considerably lower than the long-term (8-h) NIOSH limits during donning JustAir® PAPR. There was a statistically significant difference between all pairs (p

Background: Now and in the future, airborne diseases such as COVID-19 could become uncontrollable and lead the world into lockdowns. Finding alternatives to lockdowns, which limit individual freedoms and cause enormous economic losses, is critical., Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of achieving a society or a nation that does not require lockdown during a pandemic due to airborne infectious diseases through the mass production and distribution of high-performance, low-cost, and comfortable powered air purifying respirators (PAPRs)., Methods: The feasibility of a social system using PAPR as an alternative to lockdown was examined from the following perspectives: first, what PAPRs can do as an alternative to lockdown; second, how to operate a social system utilizing PAPR; third, directions of improvement of PAPR as an alternative to lockdown; and finally, balancing between efficiency of infection control and personal freedom through the use of Internet of Things (IoT)., Results: PAPR was shown to be a possible alternative to lockdown through the reduction of airborne and droplet transmissions and through a temporary reduction of infection probability per contact. A social system in which individual constraints imposed by lockdown are replaced by PAPRs was proposed, and an example of its operation is presented in this paper. For example, the government determines the type and intensity of the lockdown and activates it. At that time, the government will also indicate how PAPR can be substituted for the different activity and movement restrictions imposed during a lockdown, for example, a curfew order may be replaced with the permission to go outside if wearing a PAPR. The following 7 points were raised as directions for improvement of PAPR as an alternative method to lockdown: flow optimization, precise differential pressure control, design improvement, maintenance method, variation development such as booth type, information terminal function, and performance evaluation method. In order to achieve the effectiveness and efficiency in controlling the spread of infection and the individual freedom at a high level in a social system that uses PAPRs as an alternative to lockdown, it was considered effective to develop a PAPR wearing rate network management system utilizing IoT., Conclusions: This study shows that using PAPR with infection control ability and with less economic and social damage as an alternative to nationwide lockdown is possible during a pandemic due to airborne infectious diseases. Further, the efficiency of the government's infection control and each citizen's freedom can be balanced by using the PAPR wearing rate network management system utilizing an IoT system., (©Yusaku Fujii. Originally published in JMIR Biomedical Engineering (http://biomsedeng.jmir.org), 14.05.2024.)

Background and Purpose: COVID-19 pandemic led to wide-spread use of face-masks, respirators and other personal protective equipment (PPE) by healthcare workers. Various symptoms attributed to the use of PPE are believed to be, at least in part, due to elevated carbon-dioxide (CO2) levels. We evaluated concentrations of CO2 under various PPE.Methods: In a prospective observational study on healthy volunteers, CO2 levels were measured during regular breathing while donning 1) no mask, 2) JustAir® powered air purifying respirator (PAPR), 3) KN95 respirator, and 4) valved-respirator. Serial CO2 measurements were taken with a nasal canula at a frequency of 1-Hz for 15-min for each PPE configuration to evaluate whether National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) limits were breached.Results: The study included 11 healthy volunteers, median age 32 years (range 16-54) and 6 (55%) men. Percent mean (SD) changes in CO2 values for no mask, JustAir® PAPR, KN95 respirator and valve respirator were 0.26 (0.12), 0.59 (0.097), 2.6 (0.14) and 2.4 (0.59), respectively. Use of face masks (KN95 and valved-respirator) resulted in significant increases in CO2 concentrations, which exceeded the 8-h NIOSH exposure threshold limit value-weighted average (TLV-TWA). However, the increases in CO2 concentrations did not breach short-term (15-min) limits. Importantly, these levels were considerably lower than the long-term (8-h) NIOSH limits during donning JustAir® PAPR. There was a statistically significant difference between all pairs (p < 0.0001, except KN95 and valved-respirator (p = 0.25). However, whether increase in CO2 levels are clinically significant remains debatable.Conclusion: Although, significant increase in CO2 concentrations are noted with routinely used face-masks, the levels still remain within the NIOSH limits for short-term use. Therefore, there should not be a concern in their regular day-to-day use for healthcare providers. The clinical implications of elevated CO2 levels with long-term use of face masks needs further studies. Use of PAPR prevents relative hypercapnoea. However, whether PAPR should be advocated for healthcare workers requiring PPE for extended hours needs to evaluated in further studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]