Fit factor of masks used by Physicians in Clinical Settings

Usually, physicians use filtering respirators in clinical settings to a lesser extent than other simpler surgical masks. The study aim was to determine the fit factor of surgical and other types masks commonly used in clinical settings compared with FFP3 filtering respirators. A cross-sectional stud...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of medical sciences 2020-01, Vol.17 (17), p.2696-2702
Main Authors: De-Yñigo-Mojado, Borja, Madera-García, Javier, Becerro-de-Bengoa-Vallejo, Ricardo, Losa-Iglesias, Marta Elena, Rodríguez-Sanz, David, San-Antolín, Marta, Calvo-Lobo, Cesar, López-López, Daniel
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Aerosols
Catheters
Cross-Sectional Studies
Disease control
Equipment Design
Face - anatomy & histology
Female
Humans
Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional - prevention & control
Male
Masks
Middle Aged
Occupational safety
Particle Size
Physicians
Primary care
Research Paper
Respiration
Young Adult
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Usually, physicians use filtering respirators in clinical settings to a lesser extent than other simpler surgical masks. The study aim was to determine the fit factor of surgical and other types masks commonly used in clinical settings compared with FFP3 filtering respirators. A cross-sectional study was carried out recruiting a total sample of 78 physicians. Fit factor was measured to determine particles count into masks compared to particles count outside of the masks meanwhile physicians carried out a protocol composed by 8 exercises as well as the global fit factor total scores. First, fit factor was analyzed with the usual surgical masks used by physicians in clinical settings. Second, fit factor was determined with the proposed FFP3 filtering respirators. Most participants (97%) used surgical masks. Statistically significant differences (
ISSN:1449-1907
1449-1907
DOI:10.7150/ijms.50657