Abstract
BackgroundWe analyzed the qualitative fit test results of the filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) used at our institution to determine their performance and utility. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 12,582 qualitative fit testing results for several FFR models among 8,809 health care workers (HCWs). ResultsThe overall failure rate for HCWs was 15.2%. Nearly one-third (2933/8809, 33.3%) had multiple FFRs fit tested. HCW sex was a statistically significant indicator of fit testing failure (χ2 = 29.9, df = 1, P < .001), with women having a 44% higher likelihood (OR, 1.4; 95% CI: 1.27–1.65) than men. There were statistically significant differences in the failure rate across FFRs (Fig 4, F[5, 12475] = 8.4, P < .001). Fluidshield 46867S had a significantly higher failure rate (49%) than the 3M 1860 (P = .012), 3M 1860S (P < .001), 3M 8210 (P < .001), and Safelife (P < .001) FFRs. ConclusionsThere was a large degree of variation in fit testing results for the FFRs tested. Although we were unable to find an FFR that fit more than 95% of the HCWs successfully, we identified poorly functioning FFRs that can help our institution with decision-making and budgeting for acquisition and stocking appropriate FFRs.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
