Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39191352›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of infection control2025

Experiences when using different EHMR models: Implications for different designs and meeting user expectations.

Emily J Haas, Mihili Edirisooriya, Rohan Fernando, Caitlin McClain, Margaret Sietsema, Adam Hornbeck, Paul Thurman, Sara Angelilli, Hope Waltenbaugh, Sricharan Chalikonda and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of infection control, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

11 authors.

Emily J HaasNational Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Pittsburgh, PA. Electronic address: ejhaas@cdc.gov.
Mihili EdirisooriyaOak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, U.S. Department of Energy, Pittsburgh, PA.
Rohan FernandoNational Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Pittsburgh, PA.
Caitlin McClainOak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, U.S. Department of Energy, Pittsburgh, PA.
Margaret SietsemaNational Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Pittsburgh, PA.
Adam HornbeckNational Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Pittsburgh, PA.
Paul ThurmanSchool of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD.
Sara AngelilliClinical Operations, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA.
Hope WaltenbaughClinical Operations, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA.
Sricharan ChalikondaClinical Operations, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA.
Stella E HinesRespiratory Health Division, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, WV.

Funding

Pilot Program CoreP30ES027792 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI Gokhan M. Mutlu, Gail S Prins · 2017 to 2026
$13.6M
Intramural CDC HHS CC999999NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES027792
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNew elastomeric half-mask respirator (EHMR) models without exhalation valves (EVs) or with exhalation valve filters (EVFs) are facilitating expanded use in health settings to reduce workers' exposure to airborne hazards while acting as source control to prevent pathogen spread. The physical comfort of new models has not been assessed in comparison to previously used EHMRs with EVs.

methodsResearchers assessed 1,962 health care and emergency medical service personnels' self-reported adverse experiences from 2 cohorts while wearing EHMR models with EVs (cohort 1, n = 1,080) and without EVs or with EVFs (cohort 2, n = 882). Fisher exact test identified differences between the cohorts accounting for organizational factors when possible.

resultsCohort 1 respondents experienced communication challenges and discomfort when wearing the EHMR > 1 hour statistically significantly more often than cohort 2. Cohort 2 respondents reported statistically significantly more instances of difficulty breathing, moisture buildup, being uncomfortable to wear < 1 hour, and being uncomfortably warm.

conclusionsDiscomfort is prevalent among end users and more often among those wearing EHMRs without an EV/with an EVF. As EHMR research and development advances, prevalence in use may increase for emergency and routine situations. Organizations may not only need guidance about respirator selection but also model-specific selection.

Indexed as

Respiratory Protective DevicesAdultCohort StudiesEquipment DesignFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMasksMiddle AgedOccupational ExposureElastomeric half-mask respiratorExhalation valveHealth careRespiratory protectionUser experiences

Identifiers

PMID39191352
PMCPMC11891883

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.