Suppr超能文献

比较 N95、KN95、医用外科和布面口罩的贴合度,并评估贴合度检查的准确性。

Comparing the fit of N95, KN95, surgical, and cloth face masks and assessing the accuracy of fit checking.

机构信息

Cambridge University, San Francisco, CA, United States of America.

Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, United States of America.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2021 Jan 22;16(1):e0245688. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245688. eCollection 2021.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has made well-fitting face masks a critical piece of protective equipment for healthcare workers and civilians. While the importance of wearing face masks has been acknowledged, there remains a lack of understanding about the role of good fit in rendering protective equipment useful. In addition, supply chain constraints have caused some organizations to abandon traditional quantitative or/and qualitative fit testing, and instead, have implemented subjective fit checking. Our study seeks to quantitatively evaluate the level of fit offered by various types of masks, and most importantly, assess the accuracy of implementing fit checks by comparing fit check results to quantitative fit testing results.

METHODS

Seven participants first evaluated N95 and KN95 respirators by performing a fit check. Participants then underwent quantitative fit testing wearing five N95 respirators, a KN95 respirator, a surgical mask, and fabric masks.

RESULTS

N95 respirators offered higher degrees of protection than the other categories of masks tested; however, it should be noted that most N95 respirators failed to fit the participants adequately. Fit check responses had poor correlation with quantitative fit factor scores. KN95, surgical, and fabric masks achieved low fit factor scores, with little protective difference recorded between respiratory protection options. In addition, small facial differences were observed to have a significant impact on quantitative fit.

CONCLUSION

Fit is critical to the level of protection offered by respirators. For an N95 respirator to provide the promised protection, it must fit the participant. Performing a fit check via NHS self-assessment guidelines was an unreliable way of determining fit.

摘要

简介

COVID-19 大流行使得贴合良好的口罩成为医护人员和民众防护设备的重要组成部分。虽然佩戴口罩的重要性已得到认可,但人们对良好贴合在使防护设备发挥作用方面的作用仍缺乏了解。此外,供应链限制导致一些组织放弃了传统的定量或/和定性贴合测试,转而实施主观贴合检查。我们的研究旨在定量评估各种口罩提供的贴合程度,更重要的是,通过将贴合检查结果与定量贴合测试结果进行比较,评估实施贴合检查的准确性。

方法

七名参与者首先通过进行贴合检查来评估 N95 和 KN95 呼吸器。然后,参与者在佩戴五款 N95 呼吸器、一款 KN95 呼吸器、一款外科口罩和织物口罩的情况下接受定量贴合测试。

结果

N95 呼吸器比测试的其他类别的口罩提供更高程度的保护;然而,应当指出的是,大多数 N95 呼吸器未能充分贴合参与者。贴合检查的响应与定量贴合因子分数相关性较差。KN95、外科和织物口罩的贴合因子得分较低,在呼吸道防护选项之间记录的防护差异很小。此外,观察到微小的面部差异对定量贴合有重大影响。

结论

贴合度是呼吸器提供的防护水平的关键。为了使 N95 呼吸器提供承诺的保护,它必须贴合参与者。通过 NHS 自我评估指南进行贴合检查是确定贴合度的不可靠方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6449/7822328/14960a6558e4/pone.0245688.g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验