Abstract
Background During the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers are facing shortage in personal protective equipment, especially adequate respirators. Alternative do-it-yourself respirators (ADR) emerge, without any proof of protection. Objective Verify seal potential of two ADR compared to a common FFP2 respirator. Design Quality assessment pilot study. Setting Tertiary Care Hospital. Participants Ten anaesthesiology residents. Interventions Participants performed quantitative face-fit tests (QNFT) with three respirators to evaluate seal. A common FFP2 respirator was used as baseline (control group). ADR tested in this study are an Anaesthesia Face Mask (AFM) and a full-face Modified Snorkelling Mask (MSM) with a 3D-printed connector, both in conjunction with a breathing system filter. Main outcome measures Non-inferior seal performance of ADR over FFP2, assessed by calculated QNFT based on measured individual fit factors, as defined by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Results For each respirator a total of 90 individual fit factor measurements were taken. Within the control group, seal failed in 37 (41%) measurements but only in 10 (11%) within the AFM group and in 6 (7%) within the MSM group (P < 0.001 respectively). However, when calculating the final, mean QNFT results, no statistically significant difference was found between respirators. Successful QNFT were determined for 5 out of 10 participants in the control group, for 8 in the AFM group (P = 0.25) and for 7 in the MSM group (P = 0.69). Conclusion Both ADR do have the potential to provide non inferior seal compared to a common FFP2 respirator. While AFM respirators are easily assembled, snorkelling masks must undergo significant but feasible modifications. Our results suggest that those ADR masks might be further investigated as they seem to be viable alternatives for situations when certified respirators are not available.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
NCT04375774
Funding Statement
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval for this study (Ethical Committee No. 2020/15AVR/226) was provided by the Ethical Committee of the Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium (Chairperson Pr. JM Maloteaux) on April 15 2020. The study was undertaken at the Anaesthesiology Department of the Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium from April 16 to 20 2020.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Not yet published.
