Fit testing and comfort evaluation of prophylactic dressing use for healthcare workers under N95/P2 respirators in one health service district in Australia

Factors influencing uptake of protective behaviours by healthcare workers in England during the COVID-19 pandemic: A theory-based mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

Hospital infection control policies protect patients and healthcare workers (HCWs) and limit the spread of pathogens, but adherence to COVID-19 guidance varies. We examined hospital HCWs' enactment of social distancing and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic, factors influencing these behaviours, and acceptability and feasibility of strategies to increase social distancing.

METHODS

An online, cross-sectional survey (n = 86) and semi-structured interviews (n = 22) with HCWs in two English hospitals during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (May-December 2020). The Capability, Opportunity, Motivation (COM-B) model of behaviour change underpinned survey and topic guide questions. Spearman Rho correlations examined associations between COM-B domains and behaviours. Interviews were analysed using inductive and deductive thematic analysis. Potential strategies to improve social distancing were selected using the Behaviour Change Wheel and discussed in a stakeholder workshop (n = 8 participants).

RESULTS

Social distancing enactment was low, with 85% of participants reporting very frequently or always being in close contact with others in communal areas. PPE use was high (88% very frequently or always using PPE in typical working day). Social distancing was associated with Physical Opportunity (e.g., size of physical space), Psychological Capability (e.g., clarity of guidance), and Social Opportunity (e.g., support from managers). Use of PPE was associated with Psychological Capability (e.g., training), Physical Opportunity (e.g., availability), Social Opportunity (e.g., impact on interactions with patients), and Reflective Motivation (e.g., beliefs that PPE is effective). Local champions and team competition were viewed as feasible strategies to improve social distancing.

CONCLUSIONS

It is valuable to understand and compare the drivers of individual protective behaviours; when faced with the same level of perceived threat, PPE use was high whereas social distancing was rarely enacted. Identified influences represent targets for intervention strategies in response to future infectious disease outbreaks.

Evaluation of health worker acceptance and tolerance of respirators in clinical practice-An Australian perspective

BACKGROUND

One of the main infection prevention and control measures introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic was the focused application of respiratory protection to ensure health worker safety and the effective use of personal protective equipment. However, user acceptance of these strategies is paramount in sustainable compliance. This study explores various aspects of respirator use and provides recommendations to improve and maximize health worker safety. The aim of this study was to understand the relationship between respirator (P2/N95) comfort and user experience toward respiratory protection. The aim of this study was to understand the relationship between respirator (P2/N95) comfort and user experience toward respiratory protection.

METHODS

The nonexperimental cross-sectional design study was conducted in New South Wales, Australia between November and December 2022 using an anonymous self-administered online questionnaire in Microsoft Forms.

RESULTS

Of 2,514 respondents, 65% reported to have used a respirator every working day with only a few using a respirator once weekly or less (9%). Almost all respondents had completed at least one quantitative fit test (96%) prior to the survey. Fifty-nine percent reported to have experienced discomfort from wearing a respirator and the most reported adverse effect was difficulty communicating (64%), followed by skin irritation or acne (62%) and headache (56%).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite somewhat less favorable ratings on comfort and communication, health workers are in favor of respiratory protection. However, a focus on tolerance of respirators and strategies to address adverse effects from prolonged respirator use must be considered when implementing policies and procedures. Moreover, resources must be allocated to improve the design, breathability, and sustainability of a respirator along with education and training on how to use respiratory protection safely and effectively.

Health effects of filtering facepiece respirators: Research and clinical implications of comfort, thermal, skin, psychologic, and workplace effects

Filtering facepiece respirators (FFR's) such as N95s have become widely used in appropriate settings for personal respiratory protection and are increasingly used beyond workplace settings. Concerns about possible adverse effects have appeared in many publications, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic led to much more widespread use. This paper synthesizes known effects based upon review of publications in PubMed since 1995, addressing effects other than pulmonary and cardiovascular (reviewed elsewhere). Findings: (1) Subjective discomfort is very frequently reported; this includes general discomfort or organ-system-specific complaints such as respiratory, headache, dermatologic, and heat. Research methods are widely divergent, and we propose a taxonomy to classify such studies by methodology, study population (subjects, experimental vs. observational methodology, comparator, specificity, and timeframe) to facilitate synthesis. (2) Objective measures of increased heat and humidity within the mask are well documented. (3) Frequency and characteristics of dermatologic effects have been insufficiently evaluated. (4) Physical mask designs are varied, making generalizations challenging. (5) More studies of impact on work performance and communication are needed. (6) Studies of effect of FFR design and accompanying training materials on ease and consistency of use are needed.