ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2023
Striving to be the fittest: quantitative P2/N95 respirator fit test results among hospital staff during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- N95 filtering facepiece respirator fit assessment outcomes by gender, age, race, and facial hair in a community population sample.Annals of work exposures and health · 2026Article
- Quantitative headform fit evaluation and predictive modeling to assist with selecting N95 filtering facepiece respirators to mitigate respiratory hazards.Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the protective efficacy of a user seal check for N95 respirators through quantitative fit testing in an ambulance crew.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To provide fit rates for specific P2/N95 respirators and compare these results by age, sex, clean-shaven status, and fit tester experience. Design: Exploratory audit involving secondary analysis of existing quantitative fit testing data. Setting: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare services across Australia implemented respiratory protection protocols. This study details healthcare workers' (HCWs) fit testing results from a large Victorian public health service. Participants: Fit-tested employees of a large tertiary public health network. Methods: Fit rates for ten individual P2/N95 respirators were calculated, and the effect of age, sex, clean-shaven status, and fit tester experience was examined via logistic regression. Results: 4593 employees were included, with 97.98% successfully fitting at least one respirator. Males were found to have significantly increased odds of achieving fit success compared to females (OR 11.61 95%CI 1.60-84.10). Fit rates dropped by 4% with each 1-year age increase (OR 0.96 95%CI 0.94-0.98). Clean-shaven individuals were also more likely to achieve a fit compared to non-clean-shaved individuals (OR 79.23 95%CI 10.21-614.62). More experienced fit testers also yielded significantly higher fit rates (OR 3.95, 95%CI 2.34-6.67). Conclusions: 98% of staff achieved a successful fitting of at least one respirator, with three-panel flat fold models (Industree Trident, 3M Aura 9320A+, and 3M Aura 1870+) performing the most consistently. An individual's ability to achieve a successful fit was associated with; male sex, younger age, clean-shaven status, and fit tester experience.
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.