Baracco Gio, Eisert Sheri, Eagan Aaron, Radonovich Lewis
1Office of Public Health,Veterans Health Administration,National Center for Occupational Health and Infection Control,Gainesville,Florida.
Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2015 Jun;9(3):313-8. doi: 10.1017/dmp.2015.12. Epub 2015 Apr 15.
Specific guidance on the size and composition of respiratory protective device (RPD) stockpiles for use during a pandemic is lacking. We explore the economic aspects of stockpiling various types and combinations of RPDs by adapting a pandemic model that estimates the impact of a severe pandemic on a defined population, the number of potential interactions between patients and health care personnel, and the potential number of health care personnel needed to fulfill those needs. Our model calculates the number of the different types of RPDs that should be stockpiled and the consequent cost of purchase and storage, prorating this cost over the shelf life of the inventory. Compared with disposable N95 or powered air-purifying respirators, we show that stockpiling reusable elastomeric half-face respirators is the least costly approach. Disposable N95 respirators take up significantly more storage space, which increases relative costs. Reusing or extending the usable period of disposable devices may diminish some of these costs. We conclude that stockpiling a combination of disposable N95 and reusable half-face RPDs is the best approach to preparedness for most health care organizations. We recommend against stockpiling powered air-purifying respirators as they are much more costly than alternative approaches.
关于大流行期间使用的呼吸防护装置(RPD)储备的规模和构成,目前缺乏具体指导。我们通过采用一种大流行模型来探索储备各种类型和组合的RPD的经济方面,该模型估计严重大流行对特定人群的影响、患者与医护人员之间潜在的接触次数,以及满足这些需求所需的潜在医护人员数量。我们的模型计算了应储备的不同类型RPD的数量以及随之而来的采购和存储成本,并将此成本在库存的保质期内进行分摊。与一次性N95或动力空气净化呼吸器相比,我们发现储备可重复使用的弹性体半面罩呼吸器是成本最低的方法。一次性N95呼吸器占用的存储空间显著更多,这增加了相对成本。重复使用一次性设备或延长其使用期限可能会减少其中一些成本。我们得出结论,储备一次性N95和可重复使用的半面罩RPD的组合是大多数医疗机构做好准备的最佳方法。我们不建议储备动力空气净化呼吸器,因为它们比其他方法成本高得多。