Communicable Disease Control Branch, Infection Control Service, Department of Health, Government of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010 Sep;31(9):918-25. doi: 10.1086/655460.
To present the evaluation of a large-scale quantitative respirator-fit testing program.
Concurrent questionnaire survey of fit testers and test subjects.
Ambulatory care, home nursing care, and acute care hospitals across South Australia.
Quantitative facial-fit testing was performed with TSI PortaCount instruments for healthcare workers (HCWs) who wore 5 different models of a disposable P2 (N95-equivalent) respirator. The questionnaire included questions about the HCW's age, sex, race, occupational category, main area of work, smoking status, facial characteristics, prior training and experience in use of respiratory masks, and number of attempts to obtain a respirator fit.
A total of 6,160 HCWs were successfully fitted during the period from January through July 2007. Of the 4,472 HCWs who responded to the questionnaire and were successfully fitted, 3,707 (82.9%) were successfully fitted with the first tested respirator, 551 (12.3%) required testing with a second model, and 214 (4.8%) required 3 or more tests. We noted an increased pass rate on the first attempt over time. Asians (excluding those from South and Central Asia) had the highest failure rate (16.3% [45 of 276 Asian HCWs were unsuccessfully fitted]), and whites had the lowest (9.8% [426 of 4,338 white HCWs]). Race was highly correlated with facial shape. Among occupational groups, doctors had the highest failure rate (13.4% [81 of 604 doctors]), but they also had the highest proportion of Asians. Prior education and/or training in respirator use were not associated with a higher pass rate.
Certain facial characteristics were associated with higher or lower pass rates with regard to fit testing, and fit testers were able to select a suitable respirator on the basis of a visual assessment in the majority of cases. For the fit tester, training and experience were important factors; however, for the HCW being fitted, prior experience in respirator use was not an important factor.
介绍一项大规模定量呼吸防护器适配性测试计划的评估结果。
适配性测试人员和测试对象的同期问卷调查。
南澳大利亚的门诊、家庭护理和急性护理医院。
使用 TSI PortaCount 仪器对佩戴 5 种不同型号一次性 P2（N95 级）呼吸防护器的医护人员进行定量面部适配性测试。调查问卷包括医护人员的年龄、性别、种族、职业类别、主要工作领域、吸烟状况、面部特征、使用呼吸面罩的培训和经验、以及获得呼吸防护器适配性的尝试次数。
2007 年 1 月至 7 月期间，共有 6160 名医护人员成功适配。在 4472 名回应问卷并成功适配的医护人员中，3707 名（82.9%）医护人员首次测试的呼吸防护器适配成功，551 名（12.3%）需要测试第二种型号，214 名（4.8%）需要进行 3 次或更多次测试。我们注意到，随着时间的推移，首次尝试的通过率有所提高。亚洲人（不包括南亚和中亚人）的失败率最高（16.3%[276 名亚洲医护人员中有 45 名适配失败]），白人的失败率最低（9.8%[4338 名白人医护人员中有 426 名适配成功]）。种族与面部形状高度相关。在职业群体中，医生的失败率最高（13.4%[604 名医生中有 81 名失败]），但他们也是亚洲人比例最高的群体。在呼吸防护器使用方面的先前教育和/或培训与更高的通过率无关。
某些面部特征与适配性测试的通过率高低有关，在大多数情况下，适配性测试人员能够根据目视评估选择合适的呼吸防护器。对于适配性测试人员而言，培训和经验是重要因素；然而，对于接受适配的医护人员而言，在呼吸防护器使用方面的先前经验并不是一个重要因素。
