ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Various styles of N95/P2 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) have been used by Australian healthcare workers (HCWs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is usually driven by the national stockpile availability. Many studies demonstrate three-panel flat-fold N95/P2 FFRs have higher quantitative fit test (QNFT) pass rates than other FFR styles. This prospective randomized crossover study utilized QNFT to evaluate the performance of the new three-panel flat-fold FFR, the Trident™ P2 respirator compared to the previously most effective model, the 3M™ Aura™ 9320A + N95 respirator. METHODS: We recruited 500 participants who completed online training and QNFT on both respirators. The order of the respirator being examined first was randomly allocated. The primary outcome was the QNFT pass rate. Secondary outcomes included the overall fit factor, the individual fit factor for each exercise, and the first-attempt QNFT pass rate. RESULTS: We found that both the overall and first-attempt QNFT pass rates of the Trident P2 respirator were significantly higher than the 3M Aura (99.2% vs 92.6%, p < 0.001; and 92.6% vs 76.4%, p < 0.001 respectively). The overall fit factor and the individual fit factor were also significantly higher for the Trident FFR than the 3M Aura. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to report hospital-based QNFT results of the Trident FFR, demonstrating very high first-time and overall pass rates. Our findings are consistent with previous research showing very high QNFT pass rates with three-panel flat-fold FFRs. These findings are important for pandemic preparedness with respect to the stockpiling and safe utilization of N95/P2 respirators.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Occupational Exposure , Respiratory Protective Devices , Australia , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross-Over Studies , Equipment Design , Humans , N95 Respirators , Pandemics/prevention & control , Prospective Studies , Ventilators, MechanicalABSTRACT
The disproportionate number of foreign-born workers employed in meat and poultry processing reflects structural, social, and economic inequities that likely contribute to an increased COVID-19 incidence in this population. In May 2020, the Maryland Department of Health and CDC investigated factors that might affect person-to-person SARS-CoV-2 transmission among persons who worked at two poultry processing facilities. A survey administered to 359 workers identified differences in risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection between workers born outside the United States and U.S.-born workers. Compared with U.S.-born workers, foreign-born workers had higher odds of working in fixed locations on the production floor (odds ratio [OR] for cutup and packaging jobs = 4.8), of having shared commutes (OR = 1.9), and of living with other poultry workers (OR = 6.0). They had lower odds of participating in social gatherings (OR for visits to family = 0.2;OR for visits to friends = 0.4), and they visited fewer businesses in the week before the survey than did their U.S.-born coworkers. Some workplace risk factors can be mitigated through engineering and administrative controls focused on the production floor, and this will be of particular benefit to the foreign-born workers concentrated in these areas. Employers and health departments can also partner with local organizations to disseminate culturally and linguistically tailored messages about risk reduction behaviors in community settings, including shared transportation section and household members dwelling in close quarters.