Indoor air quality in a training centre used for sports practice.

Background: One of the measures for controlling the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was the mass closure of gyms. This measure leads us to determine the differences between indoor and outdoor air quality. That is why the objective of this study was to analyse the indoor air quality of a sports centre catering to small groups and rehabilitation. Methods: The study was conducted in a single training centre, where 26 measurements were taken in two spaces (indoors and outdoors). The air quality index, temperature, relative humidity, total volatile compounds, carbon monoxide, ozone, formaldehyde, carbon dioxide, and particulate matter were measured indoors and outdoors using the same protocol and equipment. These measurements were taken twice, once in the morning and once in the afternoon, with all measurements made at the same time, 10 am and 6 pm, respectively. Additionally, four determinations of each variable were collected during each shift, and the number of people who had trained in the room and the number of trainers were counted. Results: In the different variables analysed, the results show that CO2 and RH levels are higher indoors than outdoors in both measurement shifts. Temperatures are higher outside than inside and, in the evening, than in the morning. TVOC, AQI and PM show less variation, although they are higher outdoors in the morning. CO is highest indoors. HCHO levels are almost negligible and do not vary significantly, except for a slight increase in the afternoon outside. Ozone levels are not significant. All the variables showed practically perfect reliability in all the measurements, except for ozone measured outside in the morning. On the other hand, the variables exhibit variations between indoors and outdoors during the morning and afternoon, except for the three types of PM. Also, the data show that all the main variables measured inside the sports training centre are similar between morning and afternoon. However, outside, temperature, relative humidity and HCHO levels show significant differences between morning and afternoon while no differences are observed for the other variables. Conclusion: The indoor air quality of the training centre assessed was good and met current regulations; some of its components even exhibited better levels than fresh air. This article is the first to measure indoor air quality in a sports training centre catering to rehabilitation and small groups.

Fit factor compliance of masks and FFP3 respirators in nurses: A case-control gender study.

AIMS: To determine the fit factor and compliance with American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements of surgical masks and filtering respirators in male versus female nurses. DESIGN: A case-control gender study performed from 2016 to 2019. METHODS: A gender and age matched-paired sample of 74 nurses was recruited and divided into men (n = 37) and women (n = 37). FFP3 filtering respirators and surgical masks fit factors were compared between male and female nurses by Mann-Whitney U tests. These measurements were tested to pass or fail according to the OSHA (≥100) and AIHA (≥50) criteria by Fisher exact tests for a 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: Global fit factor mean (standard deviation) was 2.86 (2.73) and 3.55 (6.34) for male and female nurses wearing surgical masks (p = .180), respectively, and nobody passed neither OSHA nor AIHA criteria (p = 1.00). Nevertheless, global fit factor were 30.82 (28.42) and 49.65 (43.04) for male and female nurses wearing FFP3 respirators, respectively, being significantly lower and worse in male nurses (p = .037). According to OSHA criteria, only 2.70% and 13.51% of male and females nurses, respectively, passed with non-significant difference (p = .199), meanwhile 21.62% and 48.64% of male and female nurses, respectively, passed AIHA criteria showing significant differences (p = .027) wearing FFP3 respirators. CONCLUSIONS: All male and female nurses wearing surgical masks failed to pass OSHA and AIHA criteria. Global fit factor of the proposed FFP3 filtering respirators was decreased and worse in male than female nurses. IMPACT: Our recommendation is to avoid surgical masks use for protective purposes and use the proposed FFP3 filtering respirators among nurses. Each nurse should be fit tested for its own respirator with special caution in male nurses due to their lower fit factor achieved and most of them failed to pass OSHA and AIHA criteria, especially during COVID-19 pandemic.