ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The qualitative fit testing procedure would be challenging due to severe shortages, high cost, and unavailability of commercial fit test kits in the marketplaces during pandemics of respiratory infectious diseases. Assessment of alternatives for commercial fit test kits to be prepared for emergencies is critically required. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of an alternative of the Accumed NF60 nebulizer for the OSHA-approved Allegro one. METHODS: Thirty-two participants were randomly allocated to six filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs). They were qualitatively fit tested by both manual Allegro and automated Accumed NF60 nebulizers. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the Allegro and Accumed NF60 nebulizers by passing rates. The odds for passing fit testing using the Accumed NF60 nebulizer was similar to that of the Allegro one [OR=1.0, 95% CI (0.58-1.74)]. CONCLUSIONS: The Accumed NF60 nebulizer could be used as a cost-benefit substitute for the standard fit test nebulizers in the pandemic situation where there is a shortage and difficulty of access. It is more convenient, decreases the time investment, and reduces the contact stress in the operators' hands as it does not require squeezing the nebulizer bulb frequently. The test solutions' preparation and fit testing procedures on many personnel are more straightforward, efficient, and hygienic than the Allegro one.
ABSTRACT
Background: Workplaces play a highly important role in controlling or spreading the prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Therefore, the lack of proper implementation of hygienic protocols in these environments might increase the risk of getting infected with the COVID-19 among the employees, following the increase of the COVID-19 at the family and community levels. This qualitative study aims to explain the challenges of coping with the coronavirus crisis in the workplaces. Methods: The present qualitative study was conducted with a conventional content analysis approach. We used purposeful sampling with maximum diversity in terms of working processes. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews. Interviews were performed to the point of information saturation. MAXQDA software version 10 was used for data management. Results: Through the content analysis of the interviews with the participants, we identified two main classes and nine sub-classes. The main classes included intra-organizational challenges (job nature, budget allocation problems, individual factors, disorganization, manpower and equipment, lack of commitment, and insufficient support of managers) and extra-organizational challenges (lack of accessibility to valid information, black market, and inter-sectorial coordination problems). Conclusion: The study findings indicated that organizations and industries face numerous internal and external challenges in coping with the COVID-19 pandemic. Paying attention to the mentioned limitations and attempting to eliminate them, especially by the governmental organizations, employers, and managers, could help in effectively confronting the COVID-19 pandemic.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Frontline health care workers (HCWs) must wear a standard N95 or FFP2 respirator during worldwide pandemics of respiratory diseases including COVID-19 to protect against airborne infectious pathogens when performing care activities. This study aimed to quantitatively investigate the fit of most of the common FFRs used during the COVID-19 pandemic in Iran. METHODS: A total of 37 volunteers were fit tested in 20 selected FFRs in a randomized order. The selected FFRs were underwent quantitative fit testing by PortaCount® model 8038. To determine the effects of face sizes on respirator fit, the participants' facial dimensions were measured using a digital caliper. RESULTS: The rate of passing fit tests for the studied FFRs were surprisingly low with 11 out of 20 FFRs having less than 10% passing fit tests and the best performers having only 43% and 27% passing fit tests (brands 2 and 20, respectively). Cup-shaped respirators provided significantly greater fit than the vertical flat-fold ones (p < 0.001). A significantly different FFs were found among the respirator brands (F = 13.60, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Overall, unacceptably low fit factors were obtained from the studied FFRs. The main reasons for this are suspected to single size and style for each studied FFR. It confirms the importance and requirement of the proper respirator selection in that way fitted optimally into facial dimensions, appropriate usage, and properly performing the fit testing procedure. A unique fit test panel should be developed to guide respirator wearers in selecting the appropriate FFR for their specific face sizes.