Schwerin Matthew R, Portnoff Lee, Furlong Jennifer L, Das Srilekha S, Gordon Edward A, Woods Terry O, Wood Steven C, Lucas Anne D
Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993, USA.
The National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 626 Cochrans Mill Rd., Pittsburgh, PA 15236, USA.
J Test Eval. 2019 Mar 7;48(1). doi: 10.1520/jte20180350.
Personal protective equipment (PPE), such as gowns used in the latest Ebola outbreak in Western Africa, are critical in preventing the spread of deadly diseases. Appropriate test systems and test soils are needed to adequately evaluate PPE. ASTM F903, , has been used for decades to test fabrics' resistance to liquid penetration. However, this test apparatus requires at least 60 mL of test solutions, is labor intensive, and has problems with leakage around the gaskets. We compared the F903 test apparatus to a modified dot-blot apparatus to evaluate the visual penetration of a blood test soil. A series of commercially available gowns and drapes were tested in each apparatus. Using blood test soil at 2 psi, there was no statistically significant difference between the two methods except for in one gown. By comparing this gown in the ASTM test apparatus with and without a screen, the particular screen selected did not account for the difference between the dot-blot and F903 apparatuses; however, it is conceivable that a particular screen/fabric combination could account for this difference. The modified dot-blot apparatus was evaluated using three different test solutions: blood, vomit, and a labeled protein (goat anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G-horseradish peroxidase [GaR IgG-HRP]) in a blood test soil solution. This testing revealed significant difference in penetration for some of the PPE garments. The modified dot-blot had several large advantages over the ASTM apparatus-over six times less specimen volume and no edge or gasket leakage. In addition, nitrocellulose can be easily incorporated into the modified dot-blot apparatus, enabling the trapping of viruses and proteins that penetrate PPE-thus permitting the use of antibodies to quickly and sensitively detect penetration.
个人防护装备（PPE），如在西非最近一次埃博拉疫情中使用的防护服，对于预防致命疾病的传播至关重要。需要适当的测试系统和测试土壤来充分评估个人防护装备。几十年来，ASTM F903一直用于测试织物的抗液体渗透性。然而，这种测试仪器至少需要60毫升测试溶液，劳动强度大，并且垫圈周围存在泄漏问题。我们将F903测试仪器与改良的斑点印迹仪器进行比较，以评估血液测试土壤的视觉渗透性。在每个仪器中测试了一系列市售的防护服和手术单。在2 psi压力下使用血液测试土壤，除了一种防护服外，两种方法之间没有统计学上的显著差异。通过比较ASTM测试仪器中有无筛网的这种防护服，所选的特定筛网并不能解释斑点印迹仪器和F903仪器之间的差异；然而，可以想象特定的筛网/织物组合可能会导致这种差异。使用三种不同测试溶液对改良的斑点印迹仪器进行了评估：血液、呕吐物以及血液测试土壤溶液中的标记蛋白（山羊抗兔免疫球蛋白G-辣根过氧化物酶[GaR IgG-HRP]）。该测试揭示了一些个人防护装备服装在渗透性方面的显著差异。改良的斑点印迹仪器相对于ASTM仪器具有几个大优势——样品体积减少六倍以上，且无边缘或垫圈泄漏。此外，硝酸纤维素可以很容易地整合到改良的斑点印迹仪器中，能够捕获穿透个人防护装备的病毒和蛋白质——从而允许使用抗体快速、灵敏地检测渗透情况。
