ArticleSafety and health at work2019
Do Various Respirator Models Fit the Workers in the Norwegian Smelting Industry?
Article in Safety and health at work, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- The influence of gender and ethnicity on facemasks and respiratory protective equipment fit: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ global health · 2021Pooled it
- Heavy metal blood concentrations in smelters and chimney sweepers in Norway.Annals of work exposures and health · 2026Article
- Development of Korean Representative Headforms for the Total Inward Leakage Testing on Filtering Facepiece Respirators.Safety and health at work · 2024Article
- Facile method for 3D printing conformally onto uneven surfaces and its application to face masks.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Article
- P2/N95 filtering facepiece respirators: Results of a large-scale quantitative mask fit testing program in Australian health care workers.American journal of infection control · 2022Article
- Viscoelastic Polyurethane Foams with Reduced Flammability and Cytotoxicity.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A feasible route for the design and manufacture of customised respiratory protection through digital facial capture.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Air seal performance of personalized and statistically shaped 3D-printed face masks compared with market-available surgical and FFP2 masks.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Fit-testing of respiratory protective equipment in the UK during the initial response to the COVID-19 pandemic.The Journal of hospital infection · 2021Article
- Microbial contamination of powered air purifying respirators (PAPR) used by healthcare staff during the COVID-19 pandemic: an in situ microbiological study.American journal of infection control · 2021Article
- Quantitative fit testing of filtering face-piece respirators during the COVID-19 pandemic reveals anthropometric deficits in most respirators available in Iran.Journal of environmental health science & engineering · 2021Article
- Insecticide Filtration Efficiency of Respiratory Protective Equipment Commonly Worn by Farmers in Thailand.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Qualitative fitting characteristics of filtering face-piece respirators on Iranian people.Journal of environmental health science & engineering · 2020Article
- Qualitative fit testing.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRespirator fit testing is a method to assess if the respirator provides an adequate face seal for the worker.
methodsWorkers from four Norwegian smelters were invited to participate in the study, and 701 respirator fit tests were performed on 127 workers. Fourteen respirator models were included: one FFABE1P3 and 11 FFP3 respirator models produced in one size and two silicone half masks with P3 filters available in three sizes. The workers performed a quantitative fit test according to Health and Safety Executive 282/28 with 5-6 different respirator models, and they rated the respirators based on comfort. Predictors of overall fit factors were explored.
resultsThe pass rate for all fit tests was 62%, 56% for women, and 63% for men. The silicone respirators had the highest percentage of passed tests (92-100%). The pass rate for the FFP3 models varied from 19-89%, whereas the FFABE1P3 respirator had a pass rate of 36%. Five workers did not pass with any respirators, and 14 passed with all the respirators tested. Only 63% passed the test with the respirator they normally used. The mean comfort score on the scale from 1 to 5 was 3.2. The respirator model was the strongest predictor of the overall fit factor. The other predictors (age, sex, and comfort score) did not improve the fit of the model.
conclusionThere were large differences in how well the different respirator models fitted the Norwegian smelter workers. The results can be useful when choosing which respirators to include in respirator fit testing programs in similar populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.