Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26180261›Full record

ArticleThe Annals of occupational hygiene2015

Respirator Performance against Nanoparticles under Simulated Workplace Activities.

Evanly Vo, Ziqing Zhuang, Matthew Horvatin, Yuewei Liu, Xinjian He, Samy Rengasamy

Open access · bronzeAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Annals of occupational hygiene, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Aerosol-generating otolaryngology procedures and the need for enhanced PPE during the COVID-19 pandemic: a literature review.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale · 2020
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Evanly VoNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, 626 Cochrans Mill Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15236, USA; Eav8@cdc.gov.
Ziqing ZhuangNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, 626 Cochrans Mill Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15236, USA;
Matthew HorvatinURS Corporation, 626 Cochrans Mill Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15236, USA.
Yuewei LiuNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, 626 Cochrans Mill Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15236, USA;
Xinjian HeNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, 626 Cochrans Mill Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15236, USA;
Samy RengasamyNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, 626 Cochrans Mill Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15236, USA;
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health · US

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) and elastomeric half-mask respirators (EHRs) are commonly used by workers for protection against potentially hazardous particles, including engineered nanoparticles. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of these types of respirators against 10-400 nm particles using human subjects exposed to NaCl aerosols under simulated workplace activities. Simulated workplace protection factors (SWPFs) were measured for eight combinations of respirator models (2 N95 FFRs, 2 P100 FFRs, 2 N95 EHRs, and 2 P100 EHRs) worn by 25 healthy test subjects (13 females and 12 males) with varying face sizes. Before beginning a SWPF test for a given respirator model, each subject had to pass a quantitative fit test. Each SWPF test was performed using a protocol of six exercises for 3 min each: (i) normal breathing, (ii) deep breathing, (iii) moving head side to side, (iv) moving head up and down, (v) bending at the waist, and (vi) a simulated laboratory-vessel cleaning motion. Two scanning mobility particle sizers were used simultaneously to measure the upstream (outside the respirator) and downstream (inside the respirator) test aerosol; SWPF was then calculated as a ratio of the upstream and downstream particle concentrations. In general, geometric mean SWPF (GM-SWPF) was highest for the P100 EHRs, followed by P100 FFRs, N95 EHRs, and N95 FFRs. This trend holds true for nanoparticles (10-100 nm), larger size particles (100-400 nm), and the 'all size' range (10-400 nm). All respirators provided better or similar performance levels for 10-100 nm particles as compared to larger 100-400 nm particles. This study found that class P100 respirators provided higher SWPFs compared to class N95 respirators (P < 0.05) for both FFR and EHR types. All respirators provided expected performance (i.e. fifth percentile SWPF > 10) against all particle size ranges tested.

Indexed as

NanoparticlesWorkplaceAdultAerosolsAgedAir Pollutants, OccupationalEquipment DesignFemaleFiltrationHumansInhalation ExposureMaleMiddle AgedNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S.Occupational ExposureParticle SizeAerosolsAir Pollutants, Occupationalelastomeric half-mask respiratorsfiltering facepiece respiratorsN95 respiratorsnanoparticleP100 respiratorssimulated workplace protection factors

Identifiers

PMID26180261
PMCPMC5504519
OpenAlexW2284451107

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.