Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38277142›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2024

Incidence of Fit Test Failure During N95 Respirator Reuse and Extended Use.

Ralph C Wang, Nida F Degesys, Jahan Fahimi, Chengshi Jin, Efrat Rosenthal, Ann A Lazar, Anna Q Yaffee, Susan Peterson, Richard E Rothmann, Courtney M C Jones and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Ralph C WangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Nida F DegesysDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Jahan FahimiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Chengshi JinDepartment of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco.
Efrat RosenthalDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Ann A LazarDepartment of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco.
Anna Q YaffeeDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Susan PetersonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Richard E RothmannDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Courtney M C JonesDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York.
Vaishal ToliaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of California, San Diego.
Manish N ShahBerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Maria C RavenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Reuse N95 Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a widespread acute shortage of N95 respirators, prompting the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to develop guidelines for extended use and limited reuse of N95s for health care workers (HCWs). While HCWs followed these guidelines to conserve N95s, evidence from clinical settings regarding the safety of reuse and extended use is limited. Objective: To measure the incidence of fit test failure during N95 reuse and compare the incidence between N95 types. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study, conducted from April 2, 2021, to July 15, 2022, at 6 US emergency departments (EDs), included HCWs who practiced N95 reuse for more than half of their clinical shift. Those who were unwilling to wear an N95 for most of their shift, repeatedly failed baseline fit testing, were pregnant, or had facial hair or jewelry that interfered with the N95 face seal were excluded. Exposures: Wearing the same N95 for more than half of each clinical shift and for up to 5 consecutive shifts. Participants chose an N95 model available at their institution; models were categorized into 3 types: dome (3M 1860R, 1860S, and 8210), trifold (3M 1870+ and 9205+), and duckbill (Halyard 46727, 46767, and 46827). Participants underwent 2 rounds of testing using a different mask of the same type for each round. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was Occupational Safety and Health Administration-approved qualitative fit test failure. Trained coordinators conducted fit tests after clinical shifts and recorded pass or fail based on participants tasting a bitter solution. Results: A total of 412 HCWs and 824 N95s were fit tested at baseline; 21 N95s (2.5%) were withdrawn. Participants' median age was 34.5 years (IQR, 29.5-41.8 years); 252 (61.2%) were female, and 205 (49.8%) were physicians. The overall cumulative incidence of fit failure after 1 shift was 38.7% (95% CI, 35.4%-42.1%), which differed by N95 type: dome, 25.8% (95% CI, 21.2%-30.6%); duckbill, 28.3% (95% CI, 22.2%-34.7%); and trifold, 61.3% (95% CI, 55.3%-67.3%). The risk of fit failure was significantly higher for trifold than dome N95s (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.46-2.10). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of ED HCWs practicing N95 reuse, fit failure occurred in 38.7% of masks after 1 shift. Trifold N95s had higher incidence of fit failure compared with dome N95s. These results may inform pandemic preparedness, specifically policies related to N95 selection and reuse practices.

Indexed as

N95 RespiratorsRespiratory Protective DevicesAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansIncidenceMalePandemicsProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID38277142
PMCPMC12282505

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.