面罩式呼吸器和外科口罩对外科烟雾的防护性能:模拟工作场所防护系数研究

Shuang Gao, R. Koehler, Michael Yermakov, S. Grinshpun
{"title":"面罩式呼吸器和外科口罩对外科烟雾的防护性能:模拟工作场所防护系数研究","authors":"Shuang Gao, R. Koehler, Michael Yermakov, S. Grinshpun","doi":"10.1093/annhyg/mew006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objective: Surgical smoke generated during electrocautery contains toxins which may cause adverse health effects to operating room (OR) personnel. The objective of this study was to investigate the performance of surgical masks (SMs), which are routinely used in ORs, more efficient N95 surgical mask respirator (SMRs) and N100 filtering facepiece respirator (FFRs), against surgical smoke. Methods: Ten subjects were recruited to perform surgical dissections on animal tissue in a simulated OR chamber, using a standard electrocautery device, generating surgical smoke. Six respiratory protective devices (RPDs) were tested: two SMs, two SMRs, and two N100 FFRs [including a newly developed faceseal (FS) prototype]. Fit testing was conducted before the experiment. Each subject was then exposed to the surgical smoke while wearing an RPD under the tests. Concentrations inside (Cin) and outside (Cout) of the RPD were measured by a particle size spectrometer. The simulated workplace protection factor (SWPF) was determined by the ratio of Cout and Cin for each RPD-wearing subject. Results: For the SMs, the geometric means of SWPFtotal (based on the total aerosol concentration) were 1.49 and 1.76, indicating minimal protection. The SWPFtotal values of the SMRs and N100 FFRs were significantly higher than those of the SMs: for the two SMRs, the SWPFtotal were 208 and 263; for the two N100s, the SWPFtotal values were 1,089 and 2,199. No significant difference was observed between either the two SMs or the two SMRs. The SWPFtotal for the novel FS prototype N100 FFR was significantly higher than the conventional N100 FFR. The correlation between SWPFtotal and fit factor (FF) determined for two N95 SMRs was not significant. Conclusions: SMs do not provide measurable protection against surgical smoke. SMRs offer considerably improved protection versus SMs, while the N100 FFRs showed significant improvement over the SMRs. The FS prototype offered a higher level of protection than the standard N100 FFR, due to a tighter seal. While we acknowledge that conventional N100 FFRs (equipped with exhalation valves) are not practical for human OR use, the results obtained with the FS prototype demonstrate the potential of the new FS technology for implementation on various types of respirators.","PeriodicalId":8458,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Occupational Hygiene","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/annhyg/mew006","citationCount":"30","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance of Facepiece Respirators and Surgical Masks Against Surgical Smoke: Simulated Workplace Protection Factor Study\",\"authors\":\"Shuang Gao, R. Koehler, Michael Yermakov, S. Grinshpun\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/annhyg/mew006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Objective: Surgical smoke generated during electrocautery contains toxins which may cause adverse health effects to operating room (OR) personnel. The objective of this study was to investigate the performance of surgical masks (SMs), which are routinely used in ORs, more efficient N95 surgical mask respirator (SMRs) and N100 filtering facepiece respirator (FFRs), against surgical smoke. Methods: Ten subjects were recruited to perform surgical dissections on animal tissue in a simulated OR chamber, using a standard electrocautery device, generating surgical smoke. Six respiratory protective devices (RPDs) were tested: two SMs, two SMRs, and two N100 FFRs [including a newly developed faceseal (FS) prototype]. Fit testing was conducted before the experiment. Each subject was then exposed to the surgical smoke while wearing an RPD under the tests. Concentrations inside (Cin) and outside (Cout) of the RPD were measured by a particle size spectrometer. The simulated workplace protection factor (SWPF) was determined by the ratio of Cout and Cin for each RPD-wearing subject. Results: For the SMs, the geometric means of SWPFtotal (based on the total aerosol concentration) were 1.49 and 1.76, indicating minimal protection. The SWPFtotal values of the SMRs and N100 FFRs were significantly higher than those of the SMs: for the two SMRs, the SWPFtotal were 208 and 263; for the two N100s, the SWPFtotal values were 1,089 and 2,199. No significant difference was observed between either the two SMs or the two SMRs. The SWPFtotal for the novel FS prototype N100 FFR was significantly higher than the conventional N100 FFR. The correlation between SWPFtotal and fit factor (FF) determined for two N95 SMRs was not significant. Conclusions: SMs do not provide measurable protection against surgical smoke. SMRs offer considerably improved protection versus SMs, while the N100 FFRs showed significant improvement over the SMRs. The FS prototype offered a higher level of protection than the standard N100 FFR, due to a tighter seal. While we acknowledge that conventional N100 FFRs (equipped with exhalation valves) are not practical for human OR use, the results obtained with the FS prototype demonstrate the potential of the new FS technology for implementation on various types of respirators.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8458,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Occupational Hygiene\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/annhyg/mew006\",\"citationCount\":\"30\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Occupational Hygiene\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/mew006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Occupational Hygiene","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/mew006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 30

摘要

摘要目的:电灼术中产生的手术烟气中含有毒素,可能对手术室(OR)人员的健康造成不良影响。本研究的目的是调查外科手术口罩(SMs)、更高效的N95外科口罩(SMRs)和N100过滤式面罩(FFRs)对外科手术烟雾的防护性能。方法:招募10名受试者,在模拟手术室中使用标准电灼装置对动物组织进行手术解剖,产生手术烟雾。测试了六种呼吸保护装置(rpd):两个SMs,两个smr和两个N100 ffr[包括新开发的面部密封(FS)原型]。实验前进行拟合检验。然后,每个受试者在测试中都戴着RPD暴露在手术烟雾中。用粒径谱仪测定了RPD内(Cin)和外(Cout)的浓度。模拟工作场所保护系数(SWPF)由每个佩戴rpd的受试者的Cout和Cin的比值确定。结果:SMs的SWPFtotal几何平均值(基于总气溶胶浓度)为1.49和1.76,表明防护最小。小流域和N100小流域的SWPFtotal均显著高于小流域:小流域的SWPFtotal分别为208和263;两个n100的SWPFtotal分别为1089和2199。两组短信和两组短信无显著差异。新型FS原型N100 FFR的SWPFtotal显著高于传统的N100 FFR。两种N95 SMRs的SWPFtotal与fit factor (FF)的相关性不显著。结论:SMs不能对手术烟雾提供可测量的保护。相对于SMs, smr提供了显著改善的保护,而N100 ffr比smr有显著改善。由于更紧密的密封,FS原型提供了比标准N100 FFR更高的保护水平。虽然我们承认传统的N100 ffr(配备呼吸阀)不适合人类使用,但FS原型所获得的结果证明了新FS技术在各种类型呼吸器上的应用潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Performance of Facepiece Respirators and Surgical Masks Against Surgical Smoke: Simulated Workplace Protection Factor Study
Abstract Objective: Surgical smoke generated during electrocautery contains toxins which may cause adverse health effects to operating room (OR) personnel. The objective of this study was to investigate the performance of surgical masks (SMs), which are routinely used in ORs, more efficient N95 surgical mask respirator (SMRs) and N100 filtering facepiece respirator (FFRs), against surgical smoke. Methods: Ten subjects were recruited to perform surgical dissections on animal tissue in a simulated OR chamber, using a standard electrocautery device, generating surgical smoke. Six respiratory protective devices (RPDs) were tested: two SMs, two SMRs, and two N100 FFRs [including a newly developed faceseal (FS) prototype]. Fit testing was conducted before the experiment. Each subject was then exposed to the surgical smoke while wearing an RPD under the tests. Concentrations inside (Cin) and outside (Cout) of the RPD were measured by a particle size spectrometer. The simulated workplace protection factor (SWPF) was determined by the ratio of Cout and Cin for each RPD-wearing subject. Results: For the SMs, the geometric means of SWPFtotal (based on the total aerosol concentration) were 1.49 and 1.76, indicating minimal protection. The SWPFtotal values of the SMRs and N100 FFRs were significantly higher than those of the SMs: for the two SMRs, the SWPFtotal were 208 and 263; for the two N100s, the SWPFtotal values were 1,089 and 2,199. No significant difference was observed between either the two SMs or the two SMRs. The SWPFtotal for the novel FS prototype N100 FFR was significantly higher than the conventional N100 FFR. The correlation between SWPFtotal and fit factor (FF) determined for two N95 SMRs was not significant. Conclusions: SMs do not provide measurable protection against surgical smoke. SMRs offer considerably improved protection versus SMs, while the N100 FFRs showed significant improvement over the SMRs. The FS prototype offered a higher level of protection than the standard N100 FFR, due to a tighter seal. While we acknowledge that conventional N100 FFRs (equipped with exhalation valves) are not practical for human OR use, the results obtained with the FS prototype demonstrate the potential of the new FS technology for implementation on various types of respirators.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
2 months
×
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