磁共振成像呼吸器:评估呼吸保护、可用性和舒适性的随机交叉试验。

Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE Pub Date : 2024-04-29 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1017/ash.2024.50
Daryl Lindsay Williams, Benjamin Kave, Charles Bodas, Megan Roberts, Irene Ng
{"title":"磁共振成像呼吸器:评估呼吸保护、可用性和舒适性的随机交叉试验。","authors":"Daryl Lindsay Williams, Benjamin Kave, Charles Bodas, Megan Roberts, Irene Ng","doi":"10.1017/ash.2024.50","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Many available facepiece filtering respirators contain ferromagnetic components, which may cause significant problems in the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) environment. We conducted a randomized crossover trial to assess the effectiveness, usability, and comfort of 3 types of respirators, judged to be \"conditionally MRI safe\" with an aluminum nosepiece (Halyard 46727 duckbill-type respirators and Care Essentials MSK-002 bifold cup-type respirators) or \"MRI safe\" completely metal free (Eagle AG2200 semirigid cup-type respirators).</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>We recruited 120 participants to undergo a quantitative fit test (QNFT) on each of the 3 respirators in a randomized order. Participants then completed a usability and comfort assessment of each respirator.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were significant differences in the QNFT pass rates (51% for Halyard 46727, 73% for Care Essentials MSK-002, and 86% for Eagle AG2200, <i>P</i> < .001). The first-time fit test pass rate and overall fit factor were significantly higher for Eagle AG2200 compared with the other 2 respirators. Eagle AG2200 scored the lowest ratings in the ease of use and overall comfort. There were no significant differences in other modalities, including the seal rating, breathability, firmness, and overall assessment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study supports the utility of the Eagle AG2200 and Care Essentials MSK-002 respirators for healthcare professionals working in an MRI environment, based on their high QNFT pass rates and reasonably good overall usability and comfort scores. Eagle AG2200 is unique because of its metal-free construction. However, its comparatively lower usability and comfort ratings raise questions about practicality, which may be improved by greater user training.</p>","PeriodicalId":72246,"journal":{"name":"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11062788/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Magnetic resonance imaging respirators: a randomized crossover trial to assess respiratory protection, usability, and comfort.\",\"authors\":\"Daryl Lindsay Williams, Benjamin Kave, Charles Bodas, Megan Roberts, Irene Ng\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/ash.2024.50\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Many available facepiece filtering respirators contain ferromagnetic components, which may cause significant problems in the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) environment. We conducted a randomized crossover trial to assess the effectiveness, usability, and comfort of 3 types of respirators, judged to be \\\"conditionally MRI safe\\\" with an aluminum nosepiece (Halyard 46727 duckbill-type respirators and Care Essentials MSK-002 bifold cup-type respirators) or \\\"MRI safe\\\" completely metal free (Eagle AG2200 semirigid cup-type respirators).</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>We recruited 120 participants to undergo a quantitative fit test (QNFT) on each of the 3 respirators in a randomized order. Participants then completed a usability and comfort assessment of each respirator.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were significant differences in the QNFT pass rates (51% for Halyard 46727, 73% for Care Essentials MSK-002, and 86% for Eagle AG2200, <i>P</i> < .001). The first-time fit test pass rate and overall fit factor were significantly higher for Eagle AG2200 compared with the other 2 respirators. Eagle AG2200 scored the lowest ratings in the ease of use and overall comfort. There were no significant differences in other modalities, including the seal rating, breathability, firmness, and overall assessment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study supports the utility of the Eagle AG2200 and Care Essentials MSK-002 respirators for healthcare professionals working in an MRI environment, based on their high QNFT pass rates and reasonably good overall usability and comfort scores. Eagle AG2200 is unique because of its metal-free construction. However, its comparatively lower usability and comfort ratings raise questions about practicality, which may be improved by greater user training.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72246,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11062788/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2024.50\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2024.50","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:许多现有的面罩过滤式呼吸器都含有铁磁性成分,这可能会在磁共振成像(MRI)环境中造成严重问题。我们进行了一项随机交叉试验,以评估 3 种类型呼吸器的有效性、可用性和舒适性,这 3 种呼吸器被判定为 "有条件磁共振成像安全 "的铝质鼻罩(Halyard 46727 鸭嘴式呼吸器和 Care Essentials MSK-002 双折杯式呼吸器)或 "磁共振成像安全 "的完全无金属呼吸器(Eagle AG2200 半硬质杯式呼吸器):我们招募了 120 名参与者,按照随机顺序分别对 3 种呼吸器进行了定量密合度测试(QNFT)。然后,参与者完成了对每种呼吸器的可用性和舒适性评估:结果:QNFT 通过率存在明显差异(Halyard 46727 为 51%,Care Essentials MSK-002 为 73%,Eagle AG2200 为 86%,P < .001)。与其他两款呼吸机相比,Eagle AG2200 的首次密合度测试合格率和总体密合度系数明显更高。在易用性和总体舒适度方面,鹰牌 AG2200 的评分最低。在其他方面,包括密封性、透气性、坚固性和总体评估,没有明显差异:我们的研究支持 Eagle AG2200 和 Care Essentials MSK-002 呼吸器在核磁共振成像环境中工作的医护人员使用,因为这两款呼吸器的 QNFT 通过率很高,而且总体易用性和舒适性评分也相当不错。Eagle AG2200 的独特之处在于其无金属结构。然而,其相对较低的可用性和舒适度评分却引起了实用性方面的问题,这可能需要通过加强用户培训来改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Magnetic resonance imaging respirators: a randomized crossover trial to assess respiratory protection, usability, and comfort.

Objective: Many available facepiece filtering respirators contain ferromagnetic components, which may cause significant problems in the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) environment. We conducted a randomized crossover trial to assess the effectiveness, usability, and comfort of 3 types of respirators, judged to be "conditionally MRI safe" with an aluminum nosepiece (Halyard 46727 duckbill-type respirators and Care Essentials MSK-002 bifold cup-type respirators) or "MRI safe" completely metal free (Eagle AG2200 semirigid cup-type respirators).

Design and setting: We recruited 120 participants to undergo a quantitative fit test (QNFT) on each of the 3 respirators in a randomized order. Participants then completed a usability and comfort assessment of each respirator.

Results: There were significant differences in the QNFT pass rates (51% for Halyard 46727, 73% for Care Essentials MSK-002, and 86% for Eagle AG2200, P < .001). The first-time fit test pass rate and overall fit factor were significantly higher for Eagle AG2200 compared with the other 2 respirators. Eagle AG2200 scored the lowest ratings in the ease of use and overall comfort. There were no significant differences in other modalities, including the seal rating, breathability, firmness, and overall assessment.

Conclusions: Our study supports the utility of the Eagle AG2200 and Care Essentials MSK-002 respirators for healthcare professionals working in an MRI environment, based on their high QNFT pass rates and reasonably good overall usability and comfort scores. Eagle AG2200 is unique because of its metal-free construction. However, its comparatively lower usability and comfort ratings raise questions about practicality, which may be improved by greater user training.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信