Reducing respirator fit test errors: a multi-donning approach

As a continuation of recent studies to assess the accuracy of existing fit test methods, a multi-donning approach to fit testing is presented. As an example of that approach, a multi-donning quantitative fit test for filtering-facepiece respirators is presented and analyzed by comparing its error rates with those of the single-donning approach of current fit test methods. That analysis indicates the multi-donning fit test has the potential to reduce both the alpha error and the beta error to half that of single-donning fit tests. The alpha error is the error of failing a respirator that should pass; the beta error is the error of passing a respirator that should fail. Lowering fit test error rates for filtering-facepiece respirators is important because fit testing is an essential means of helping assure that an individual has selected an adequately fitting respirator. To reduce the alpha and beta error inherent in current fit test methods, the proposed fit test for filtering-facepiece respirators incorporates five donnings of the facepiece, unlike the single donning of existing fit test methods. The analysis presented here indicates that the multiple-donning approach reduces the element of chance in the fit test result and thereby increases the consistency and accuracy of the fit tests. The time to conduct the multi-donning test can approximate the time for current, single-donning tests by shortening the time the respirator is worn after each donning to about 10 sec. And, unlike current fit tests for filtering-facepieces that measure only faceseal leakage, the example multiple-donning fit test considered here is based on a measurement of total leakage (faceseal plus filter). Utilizing total respirator leakage can result in simpler quantitative fit test instrumentation and a fit test that is more relevant to the workplace. Further trials with human subjects are recommended in order to validate the proposed multi-donning approach.     

Impact of time and assisted donning on respirator fit

The goal of this study was to examine the impact of assistance with donning and time on quantitative fit factors (FF) and pass rates for subjects wearing an N95 filtering facepiece respirator (FFR) and a non-certified adhesive mask. Fit factors were measured using two side-by-side TSI Portacount instruments sampling second-by-second simultaneous inside- and outside-facepiece concentrations. Naïve subjects made two visits at least one week apart. At each visit subjects first donned either the respirator or adhesive mask without assistance and performed a five-exercise fast fit test. They then donned a new respirator or mask with assistance in proper donning (e.g., proper forming of the nosepiece, strap placement, etc.) and performed a second five-exercise fast fit test. The same sequence of unassisted and assisted donning was then repeated with the other facepiece. Fifteen subjects participated in the study; time between visits ranged from 7–29 days (average 12 days). On visit 1 the respirator FFs were significantly higher (GM = 88) than for the adhesive mask (GM = 14); with assistance these FFs showed significant improvements to 116 and 124, respectively. At visit 1 almost half of subjects donning the respirator without assistance achieved a passing FF of 100 or greater, while only one-fifth of subjects were able to pass the fit test wearing an adhesive mask without assistance. Pass rates improved for both groups with assistance, but more so for the adhesive mask wearers. On visit 2 the pass rates for both groups had decreased, with the adhesive mask group showing a greater decrease. With assistance, pass rates improved for both groups, but again more so for those wearing the adhesive mask. Results suggest that wearers would benefit from assistance and re-training every time they don a respirator, even if the time between donnings is as short as one or two weeks.     

Comparison of five methods for fit-testing N95 filtering-facepiece respirators

Five fit-testing methods (Bitrex, ambient aerosol condensation nuclei counter using the TSI PortaCount Plus, saccharin, modified ambient aerosol condensation nuclei counter using the TSI PortaCount Plus with the N95-Companion, and generated aerosol using corn oil) were evaluated for their ability to identify poorly fitting N95 filtering-facepiece respirators. Eighteen models of NIOSH-certified, N95 filtering-facepiece respirators were tested by a panel of 25 subjects using each fit-testing method. The penetration of the corn oil and the ambient aerosols through the filter media of each respirator was measured in order to adjust the corresponding generated and ambient aerosol overall fit factors, reflecting only face-seal leakage. Fit-testing results were compared to 5th percentiles of simulated workplace protection factors. Beta errors (the chance of passing a fit-test in error) ranged from 3 percent to 11 percent. Alpha errors (the chance of failing a fit-test in error) ranged from 51 percent to 84 percent. The ambient aerosol using the TSI PortaCount Plus and the generated aerosol methods identified poorly fitting respirators better than the saccharin, the Companion, and Bitrex methods. These errors rates should be considered when selecting a fit-testing method for fitting N95 filtering-facepieces. When both types of errors were combined as an assignment error, the ambient aerosol method using the TSI PortaCount Plus had the lowest percentage of wearers being assigned a poor-fitting respirator.     

Correlation between quantitative fit factors and workplace protection factors measured in actual workplace environments at a steel foundry

Past studies have found little or no correlation between workplace protection factors (WPFs) and quantitative fit factors (FFs). This study investigated the effect of good- and poor-fitting half-facepiece, air-purifying respirators on protection in actual workplace environments at a steel foundry and the correlation between WPFs and FFs. Fifteen burners and welders, who wore respirators voluntarily, and chippers participated in this study. Each subject was fit-tested with two respirator models each with three sizes, for a total of six fit-tests. Models and sizes were assigned this way to provide a wide range of FFs among study participants. Each worker donned the respirator twice per day (at the beginning of the shift and following the lunch break) for 2 days. Quantitative FFs were first obtained for each donning using the PortaCount Plus trade mark in a separate room. Without redonning the respirators, workers performed normal work for 1 to 2 hours, and WPFs were measured by collecting ambient and in-facepiece samples simultaneously. A second fit-test was conducted without disturbing the respirator. FFs were obtained by averaging the results from the first and second fit-tests. The resulting FFs had a geometric mean (GM) of 400 (range=10-6010) and a geometric standard deviation (GSD) of 6.1. Of the 55 valid donnings, 43 were good fitting (FFs> or =100) and 12 were poor fitting (FFs<100). The WPFs had a GM of 920 (range=13-230,000) and a GSD of 17.8. The WPFs were found to be significantly correlated with the FFs (R(2)=.55 and p-value=.0001). Therefore, FF was shown to be a meaningful indicator of respirator performance in actual workplace environments.     

Recommended test methods and pass/fail criteria for a respirator fit capability test of half-mask air-purifying respirators

This study assessed key test parameters and pass/fail criteria options for developing a respirator fit capability (RFC) test for half-mask air-purifying particulate respirators. Using a 25-subject test panel, benchmark RFC data were collected for 101 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health-certified respirator models. These models were further grouped into 61 one-, two-, or three-size families. Fit testing was done using a PortaCount® Plus with N95-Companion accessory and an Occupational Safety and Health Administration-accepted quantitative fit test protocol. Three repeated tests (donnings) per subject/respirator model combination were performed. The panel passing rate (PPR) (number or percentage of the 25-subject panel achieving acceptable fit) was determined for each model using five different alternative criteria for determining acceptable fit.

When the 101 models are evaluated individually (i.e., not grouped by families), the percentages of models capable of fitting >75% (19/25 subjects) of the panel were 29% and 32% for subjects achieving a fit factor ≥100 for at least one of the first two donnings and at least one of three donnings, respectively. When the models are evaluated grouped into families and using >75% of panel subjects achieving a fit factor ≥100 for at least one of two donnings as the PPR pass/fail criterion, 48% of all models can pass. When >50% (13/25 subjects) of panel subjects was the PPR criterion, the percentage of passing models increased to 70%.

Testing respirators grouped into families and evaluating the first two donnings for each of two respirator sizes provided the best balance between meeting end user expectations and creating a performance bar for manufacturers. Specifying the test criterion for a subject obtaining acceptable fit as achieving a fit factor ≥100 on at least one out of the two donnings is reasonable because a majority of existing respirator families can achieve an PPR of >50% using this criterion. The different test criteria can be considered by standards development organizations when developing standards.     

Respirator fit factor performance while sweating

The extent to which sweat accumulation inside respirators affects respirator fit has not been quantified. This study represents an attempt to measure facial sweating and to quantify its effects on fit factors of negative pressure, full-facepiece respirators. Respirator fit factor (FF) data were obtained while 14 subjects completed 30 minutes of treadmill walking at an intensity of 75% of age-predicted maximal heart rate in an aerosol test chamber under ambient environmental conditions. Subject facial and whole body sweat production were also measured. Statistical analysis of the treadmill FF results showed that respirator fit was significantly (p < 0.05) degraded after 14 minutes of exercise. Sweat accumulation inside the respirator facepiece averaged 30.9 +/- 15.5 g. However, no significant correlation of subject facial sweat production with overall FF values measured during exercise was found. The results of this study indicate that respirator FFs degrade significantly over time under moderate exercise and environmental conditions and suggest that facial sweat accumulation alone does not account for the reduced FF levels.     

Respirator donning in post-hurricane New Orleans

We evaluated correctness of N95 filtering facepiece respirator donning by the public in post-hurricane New Orleans, where respirators were recommended for mold remediation. We randomly selected, interviewed, and observed 538 participants, using multiple logistic regression for analysis. Only 129 (24%) participants demonstrated proper donning. Errors included nose clip not tightened (71%) and straps incorrectly placed (52%); 22% put on the respirator upside down. Factors independently associated with proper donning were as follows: ever having used a mask or respirator (odds ratio [OR] 5.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.79-22.64); ever having had a respirator fit test (OR 4.40; 95% CI, 2.52-7.81); being male (OR 2.44; 95% CI, 1.50-4.03); Caucasian race (OR 2.09; 95% CI, 1.32-3.33); having a certified respirator (OR 1.99, 95% CI, 1.20-3.28); and having participated in mold clean-up (OR 1.82; 95% CI,1.00-3.41). Interventions to improve respirator donning should be considered in planning for influenza epidemics and disasters.     

A modified protocol for quantitative fit testing using the PortaCount

A modified quantitative fit testing method has been developed for testing half masks using the TSI PortaCount respirator fit tester. This approach focuses on shortening the time for each exercise during fit testing; however, the shortened protocol is applied only to the very good-fitting masks. For marginal-fitting masks, the testing is carried out according to the full Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) respiratory protection standard (29CFR1910.134).(1) The shortened protocol (currently not approved by OSHA) still uses all the exercises required by the OSHA standard but for a shorter time (30 seconds [s] for each exercise instead of the usual 60 s). How good the fit has to be to qualify for a shortened exercise is determined by the statistical analysis of a large data set containing pass and fail fit-test data. The statistical analysis involves calculating the sensitivity and specificity of the pass and failed fit tests on half masks. From this analysis, a multiplication factor (K) to the OSHA pass/fail criterion was developed. For a respirator to undergo the shortened protocol, the fit factor obtained during any exercise must be K times the OSHA pass/fail criterion of 100 for half masks. Hence, this approach is more conservative than fit testing protocols that involve shortened exercises regardless of the fit. Nevertheless, this approach still saves time without compromising the accuracy of the fit test expressed in terms of sensitivity and specificity. For the existing data, 85 percent of the fit tests would have been performed according to the faster test protocol while only 15 percent of the tests would have been tested according to the full-length OSHA test protocol.     

Determination of known exhalation valve damage using a negative pressure user seal check method on full facepiece respirators

A negative pressure user seal check (NPUSC) method was evaluated for its ability to adequately detect known exhalation valve leakage into a respirator. Three valves with different types of damage were included. Twenty-six test subjects, wearing full facepiece respirators, were asked to perform a NPUSC. Their responses as to whether they passed or failed the user seal check were compared to fit testing results from two quantitative fit test methods: ambient aerosol and controlled negative pressure. In addition, equipment developed at the University of Cincinnati was used to measure in-mask pressures that are generated during the performance of NPUSCs. This technique was employed to assess the ability of respirator wearers to properly conduct user seal checks. The data were analyzed to determine if the user seal check procedure is an effective method for detecting known exhalation valve damage. All test subjects reported passing the user seal check with the undamaged valve. With the warped valve installed, 95 percent of test subjects reported passing the user seal check. With the slit valve installed, 73 percent of test subjects reported passing. With the dirty valve installed, 65 percent reported passing. All fit factors, measured with the damaged valves, were below the Occupational Safety and Health Administration-recognized pass/fail criteria except one fit test with the respirator equipped with the slit valve. Results from the in-mask pressure measurements confirmed whether or not the subject properly conducted a user seal check, but did not detect respirator leakage. In conclusion, the performance of a NPUSC rarely helped to identify damaged exhalation valves. These results support the need for respirator inspection prior to donning with periodic fit testing and the performance of user seal checks as necessary components of an adequate respiratory protection program.     

Correlation of qualitative and quantitative results from testing respirator fit

Three qualitative respirator fit tests were evaluated for their ability to adequately measure respiratory protection. The evaluated methods were the negative pressure test, the isoamyl acetate test, and the irritant smoke test. Each test was performed concurrently with a single quantitative fit test, the dioctylphthalate (DOP) test, during 274 half-mask and 274 full facepiece wearings. The quantitative values of DOP penetration obtained after passing or failing each qualitative fit test were lognormally distributed. For each qualitative test performed on each mask type, the average log penetration values obtained after passing and failing each test were statistically different from each other. The mean of the log penetration values associated with the failed qualitative test was always larger than the mean of the log penetration values associated with passed qualitative tests for all three qualitative methods. Most (95%) of the tested study had adequately fitting respirators as determined by quantitative testing. Of these subjects, 96% to 100% passed the qualitative fit tests. Of the 5% of the study subjects with inadequately fitting half mask respirators, 93% to 100% of the inadequate fits were detected by qualitative methods. Twenty three to 46% of the poorly fitting full face masks were detected by qualitative methods. The probability of passing or failing a qualitative test with an inadequately fitting respirator can be estimated; however, the uncertainty associated with each estimate is large due to the small number of study subjects with poorly fitting respirators.     

A comparison of total inward leakage measured using sodium chloride (NaCl) and corn oil aerosol methods for air-purifying respirators

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standard 16900-1:2014 specifies the use of sodium chloride (NaCl) and corn oil aerosols, and sulfur hexafluoride gas for measuring total inward leakage (TIL). However, a comparison of TIL between different agents is lacking. The objective of this study was to measure and compare TIL for respirators using corn oil and NaCl aerosols. TIL was measured with 10 subjects donning two models of filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) including FFP1, N95, P100, and elastomeric half-mask respirators (ERs) in NaCl and corn oil aerosol test chambers, using continuous sampling methods. After fit testing with a PortaCount (TSI, Inc., St. Paul, MN) using the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) protocol, five subjects were tested in the NaCl chamber first and then in the corn oil chamber, while other subjects tested in the reverse order. TIL was measured as a ratio of mass-based aerosol concentrations in-mask to the test chamber, while the subjects performed ISO 16900-1-defined exercises. The concentration of NaCl aerosol was measured using two flame photometers, and corn oil aerosol was measured with one light scattering photometer. The same instruments were used to measure filter penetration in both chambers using a Plexiglas setup. The size distribution of aerosols was determined using a scanning mobility particle sizer and charge was measured with an electrometer. Filter efficiency was measured using an 8130 Automated Filter Tester (TSI). Results showed the geometric mean TIL for corn oil aerosol for one model each of all respirator categories, except P100, were significantly (p?相似文献   

Development of an Advanced Respirator Fit-Test Headform

Improved respirator test headforms are needed to measure the fit of N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) for protection studies against viable airborne particles. A Static (i.e., non-moving, non-speaking) Advanced Headform (StAH) was developed for evaluating the fit of N95 FFRs. The StAH was developed based on the anthropometric dimensions of a digital headform reported by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and has a silicone polymer skin with defined local tissue thicknesses. Quantitative fit factor evaluations were performed on seven N95 FFR models of various sizes and designs. Donnings were performed with and without a pre-test leak checking method. For each method, four replicate FFR samples of each of the seven models were tested with two donnings per replicate, resulting in a total of 56 tests per donning method. Each fit factor evaluation was comprised of three 86-sec exercises: “Normal Breathing” (NB, 11.2 liters per min (lpm)), “Deep Breathing” (DB, 20.4 lpm), then NB again. A fit factor for each exercise and an overall test fit factor were obtained. Analysis of variance methods were used to identify statistical differences among fit factors (analyzed as logarithms) for different FFR models, exercises, and testing methods. For each FFR model and for each testing method, the NB and DB fit factor data were not significantly different (P > 0.05). Significant differences were seen in the overall exercise fit factor data for the two donning methods among all FFR models (pooled data) and in the overall exercise fit factor data for the two testing methods within certain models. Utilization of the leak checking method improved the rate of obtaining overall exercise fit factors ≥100. The FFR models, which are expected to achieve overall fit factors ≥ 100 on human subjects, achieved overall exercise fit factors ≥ 100 on the StAH. Further research is needed to evaluate the correlation of FFRs fitted on the StAH to FFRs fitted on people.

[Supplementary materials are available for this article. Go to the publisher's online edition of Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene for the following free supplemental resource: a file providing detailed information on the advanced head form design and fabrication process.]     

Respiratory protection against Mycobacterium tuberculosis: quantitative fit test outcomes for five type N95 filtering-facepiece respirators

In preparing to fit test a large workforce, a respirator program manager needs to initially choose respirators that will fit the greatest proportion of employees and achieve the best fits. This article discusses our strategy in selecting respirators from an initial array of seven NIOSH-certified Type N95 filtering-facepiece devices for a respiratory protection program against Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tb) aerosol. The seven respirators were screened based on manufacturer-provided fit test data, comfort, and cost. From these 7 devices, 5 were chosen for quantitative fit testing on 40 subjects who were a convenience sample from a cohort of approximately 30,000 workers scheduled to undergo fit testing. Across the five brands, medium/regular-size respirators fit from 8% to 95% of the subjects; providing another size of the same brand improved the pass rates slightly. Gender was not found to significantly affect fit test pass rates for any respirator brand. Among test panel members, an Aearo Corporation respirator (TC 84A-2630) and a 3M Company respirator (TC 84A-0006) provided the highest overall pass rates of 98% and 90%, respectively. We selected these two brands for fit testing in the larger worker cohort. To date, these two respirators have provided overall pass rates of 98% (1793/1830) and 88% (50/57), respectively, which are similar to the test panel results. Among 1850 individuals who have been fit tested, 1843 (99.6%) have been successfully fitted with one or the other brand. In a separate analysis, we used the test panel pass rates to estimate the reduction in M. tb infection risk afforded by the medium/regular-size of five filtering-facepiece respirators. We posed a low-exposure versus a high-exposure scenario for health care workers and assumed that respirators could be assigned without conducting fit testing, as proposed by many hospital infection control practitioners. Among those who would pass versus fail the fit test, we assumed an average respirator penetration (primarily due to faceseal leakage) of .04 and 0.3, respectively. The respirator with the highest overall pass rate (95%) reduced M. tb infection risk by 95%, while the respirator with the lowest pass rate (8%) reduced M. tb infection risk by only 70%. To promote the marketing of respirators that will successfully fit the highest proportion of wearers, and to increase protection for workers who might use respirators without the benefit of being fit tested, we recommend that fit testing be part of the NIOSH certification process for negative-pressure air-purifying respirators with tightly fitting facepieces. At a minimum, we recommend that respirator manufacturers generate and provide pass rate data to assist in selecting candidate respirators. In any event, program managers can initially select candidate respirators by comparing quantitative fit tests for a representative sample of their employee population.     

Comparison of simulated respirator fit factors using aerosol and vapor challenges

Although not well established, mask leakage measured using submicron aerosol challenges is generally accepted as being representative of vapor challenges. The purpose of this study was to compare simulated respirator fit factors (FFs) measured using vapor challenges to those measured using an aerosol challenge. A full-facepiece respirator was mounted on a headform inside a small enclosure and modified with controlled leaks (laser-drilled orifices) to produce FFs ranging from about 300 to 30,000. A breathing machine was used to simulate breathing conditions of 1.0 L tidal volume and 25 breaths/min. A monodisperse aerosol consisting of 0.72 micron polystyrene latex spheres (PSL) was used for the reference test aerosol, and FFs were measured using a laser aerosol spectrometer. An inert gas, sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), and an organic vapor, isoamyl acetate (IAA), were used as the vapor challenges. The in-mask concentration of SF6 was measured using a gas chromatograph (GC). A GC was also used to quantify in-mask IAA concentration samples actively collected with sorbent tubes. FF measurements made with the PSL aerosol challenge were conducted in sequence with the SF6 and IAA challenges, without disturbing the mask, to yield matched data pairs for regression analysis. FFs measured using the PSL reference aerosol were found to correlate well with those measured with the SF6 (r2 = 0.99) and IAA (r2 = 0.98) vapor challenges. FFs measured using IAA tended to be higher at values below 10,000. The best agreement was observed with the inert gas, SF6. The results of this study suggest that submicron aerosols are suitable as quantitative fit test challenges for assessing the performance of respirators against inert vapors.     

Fitting characteristics of eighteen N95 filtering-facepiece respirators

Four performance measures were used to evaluate the fitting characteristics of 18 models of N95 filtering-facepiece respirators: (1) the 5th percentile simulated workplace protection factor (SWPF) value, (2) the shift average SWPF value, (3) the h-value, and (4) the assignment error. The effect of fit-testing on the level of protection provided by the respirators was also evaluated. The respirators were tested on a panel of 25 subjects with various face sizes. Simulated workplace protection factor values, determined from six total penetration (face-seal leakage plus filter penetration) tests with re-donning between each test, were used to indicate respirator performance. Five fit-tests were used: Bitrex, saccharin, generated aerosol corrected for filter penetration, PortaCount Plus corrected for filter penetration, and the PortaCount Plus with the N95-Companion accessory. Without fit-testing, the 5th percentile SWPF for all models combined was 2.9 with individual model values ranging from 1.3 to 48.0. Passing a fit-test generally resulted in an increase in protection. In addition, the h-value of each respirator was computed. The h-value has been determined to be the population fraction of individuals who will obtain an adequate level of protection (i.e., SWPF >/=10, which is the expected level of protection for half-facepiece respirators) when a respirator is selected and donned (including a user seal check) in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions without fit-testing. The h-value for all models combined was 0.74 (i.e., 74% of all donnings resulted in an adequate level of protection), with individual model h-values ranging from 0.31 to 0.99. Only three models had h-values above 0.95. Higher SWPF values were achieved by excluding SWPF values determined for test subject/respirator combinations that failed a fit-test. The improvement was greatest for respirator models with lower h-values. Using the concepts of shift average and assignment error to measure respirator performance yielded similar results. The highest level of protection was provided by passing a fit-test with a respirator having good fitting characteristics.     

Comparison of two quantitative fit-test methods using N95 filtering facepiece respirators

Current regulations require annual fit testing before an employee can wear a respirator during work activities. The goal of this research is to determine whether respirator fit measured with two TSI Portacount instruments simultaneously sampling ambient particle concentrations inside and outside of the respirator facepiece is similar to fit measured during an ambient aerosol condensation nuclei counter quantitative fit test.

Sixteen subjects (ten female; six male) were recruited for a range of facial sizes. Each subject donned an N95 filtering facepiece respirator, completed two fit tests in random order (ambient aerosol condensation nuclei counter quantitative fit test and two-instrument real-time fit test) without removing or adjusting the respirator between tests. Fit tests were compared using Spearman's rank correlation coefficients.

The real-time two-instrument method fit factors were similar to those measured with the single-instrument quantitative fit test. The first four exercises were highly correlated (r > 0.7) between the two protocols. Respirator fit was altered during the talking or grimace exercise, both of which involve facial movements that could dislodge the facepiece.

Our analyses suggest that the new real-time two-instrument methodology can be used in future studies to evaluate fit before and during work activities.     

Analysis of forces generated by n95 filtering facepiece respirator tethering devices: a pilot study

The restorative forces of elasticized tethering devices on N95 filtering facepiece respirators (N95 FFR), that occur in response to the application of a load (applied force) during donning, create the requisite pressure to effectively seal the respirator against the face and prevent excessive inward migration of harmful elements. Many workers don and doff the same N95 FFR multiple times in the course of a single workday, yet little is known regarding the possible degradation of these restorative loads and, by implication, protection with multiple donnings. This laboratory pilot study evaluated the degradation in loads of tethering devices of three models of N95 FFRs subjected to the strain of five wear periods of 15?min interspersed with 15-min periods without wear. Data indicate that there were load degradations at each donning that differed significantly with the FFR model (p = <0.001), the greatest of which occurred with the first donning. The N95 FFR model with the lowest restorative loads was able to pass fit testing in a previous study, indicating that lower loads, perhaps coupled with FFR model-specific features, are sufficient to provide an adequate face/FFR interface seal. Tethering devices are importantly related to issues of comfort and protection afforded by N95 FFR and additional research is warranted.     

Correlation between respirator fit and respirator fit test panel cells by respirator size

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), recognizing the difficulties inherent in using old military data to define modern industrial respirator fit test panels, recently completed a study to develop an anthropometric database of the measurements of heads and faces of civilian respirator users. Based on the data collected, NIOSH researchers developed two new panels for fit testing half-facepiece and full-facepiece respirators. One of the new panels (NIOSH bivariate panel) uses face length and face width. The other panel is based on principal component analysis (PCA) to identify the linear combination of facial dimensions that best explains facial variations. The objective of this study was to investigate the correlation between respirator fit and the new NIOSH respirator fit test panel cells for various respirator sizes. This study was carried out on 30 subjects that were selected in part using the new NIOSH bivariate panel. Fit tests were conducted on the test subjects using a PORTACOUNT device and three exercises. Each subject was tested with three replications of four models of P-100 half-facepiece respirators in three sizes. This study found that respirator size significantly influenced fit within a given panel cell. Face size categories also matched the respirator sizing reasonably well, in that the small, medium, and large face size categories achieved the highest geometric mean fit factors in the small, medium, and large respirator sizes, respectively. The same pattern holds for fit test passing rate. Therefore, a correlation was found between respirator fit and the new NIOSH bivariate fit test panel cells for various respirator sizes. Face sizes classified by the PCA panel also followed a similar pattern with respirator fit although not quite as consistently. For the LANL panel, however, both small and medium faces achieved best fit in small size respirators, and large faces achieved best fit in medium respirators. These findings support the selection of the facial dimensions for developing the new NIOSH bivariate respirator fit test panel.     

Quantitative respirator fit testing: dynamic pressure versus aerosol measurement

A noninvasive, fast, inexpensive new fit testing method has been invented which relates the slope of the pressure decay inside a respirator during breath-holding to the fit of the respirator on the wearer's face. The dynamic pressure test has been compared with the conventional aerosol test at different leakage levels. The results of this comparison show that the sensitivity of the dynamic pressure test is similar to that of the aerosol test. The pressure test, however, is independent of leak site and probe location and can be performed on respirators before and after their use.     

Nanoparticle filtration performance of NIOSH-certified particulate air-purifying filtering facepiece respirators: evaluation by light scattering photometric and particle number-based test methods

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) certification test methods employ charge neutralized NaCl or dioctyl phthalate (DOP) aerosols to measure filter penetration levels of air-purifying particulate respirators photometrically using a TSI 8130 automated filter tester at 85 L/min. A previous study in our laboratory found that widely different filter penetration levels were measured for nanoparticles depending on whether a particle number (count)-based detector or a photometric detector was used. The purpose of this study was to better understand the influence of key test parameters, including filter media type, challenge aerosol size range, and detector system. Initial penetration levels for 17 models of NIOSH-approved N-, R-, and P-series filtering facepiece respirators were measured using the TSI 8130 photometric method and compared with the particle number-based penetration (obtained using two ultrafine condensation particle counters) for the same challenge aerosols generated by the TSI 8130. In general, the penetration obtained by the photometric method was less than the penetration obtained with the number-based method. Filter penetration was also measured for ambient room aerosols. Penetration measured by the TSI 8130 photometric method was lower than the number-based ambient aerosol penetration values. Number-based monodisperse NaCl aerosol penetration measurements showed that the most penetrating particle size was in the 50 nm range for all respirator models tested, with the exception of one model at ~200 nm size. Respirator models containing electrostatic filter media also showed lower penetration values with the TSI 8130 photometric method than the number-based penetration obtained for the most penetrating monodisperse particles. Results suggest that to provide a more challenging respirator filter test method than what is currently used for respirators containing electrostatic media, the test method should utilize a sufficient number of particles <100 nm and a count (particle number)-based detector.