The objective of this study was to determine if ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI), moist heat incubation (MHI), or microwave-generated steam (MGS) decontamination affects the fitting characteristics, odor, comfort, or donning ease of six N95 filtering facepiece respirator (FFR) models. For each model, 10 experienced test subjects qualified for the study by passing a standard OSHA quantitative fit test. Once qualified, each subject performed a series of fit tests to assess respirator fit and completed surveys to evaluate odor, comfort, and donning ease with FFRs that were not decontaminated (controls) and with FFRs of the same model that had been decontaminated. Respirator fit was quantitatively measured using a multidonning protocol with the TSI PORTACOUNT Plus and the N95 Companion accessory (designed to count only particles resulting from face to face-seal leakage). Participants' subjective appraisals of the respirator's odor, comfort, and donning ease were captured using a visual analog scale survey. Wilcoxon signed rank tests compared median values for fit, odor, comfort, and donning ease for each FFR and decontamination method against their respective controls for a given model. Two of the six FFRs demonstrated a statistically significant reduction (p< 0.05) in fit after MHI decontamination. However, for these two FFR models, post-decontamination mean fit factors were still ≥ 100. One of the other FFRs demonstrated a relatively small though statistically significant increase (p < 0.05) in median odor response after MHI decontamination. These data suggest that FFR users with characteristics similar to those in this study population would be unlikely to experience a clinically meaningful reduction in fit, increase in odor, increase in discomfort, or increased difficulty in donning with the six FFRs included in this study after UVGI, MHI, or MGS decontamination. Further research is needed before decontamination of N95 FFRs for purposes of reuse can be recommended.

Background Emergence of the novel 2009 influenza A H1N1 virus in California led to an evaluation of hospital respiratory protection programs (RPPs) and practices by the California Department of Public Health during the 2009–2010 influenza season. Methods Onsite evaluation of 16 hospitals consisted of interviews with managers and health care workers about RPPs and practices, review of written RPPs, and limited observations of personnel using respirators. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results All hospitals had implemented policies requiring the minimum use of N95 filtering facepiece respirators when working with patients with H1N1 virus infection; 95.5% of health care workers (n = 199) reported they would wear at least this level of protection when in close contact with a patient with confirmed or suspected H1N1 virus infection. However, evaluation of written RPPs indicated deficiencies in required areas, most commonly in recordkeeping, designation of a program administrator, program evaluation, employee training, and fit testing procedures. Conclusions Health care workers were aware of respiratory protection required when providing care for patients with confirmed or suspected H1N1 virus infection. Hospitals should improve written RPPs, fully implement written procedures, and conduct periodic program evaluation to ensure effectiveness of respirator use for health care worker protection. Increased accessibility of resources tailored for hospital respirator program administrators may be helpful.

Background Lessons learned from the influenza A (H1N1) virus revealed a need to better understand hospitals’ respiratory protection programmatic practice gaps. This article reports findings from a multistate assessment of hospitals’ adherence to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s respiratory protection program (RPP) requirements and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s infection control guidance. Methods Onsite surveys were conducted in 98 acute care hospitals in 6 U.S. states, including >1,500 hospital managers, unit managers, and health care workers. Descriptive statistics were used to assess hospital adherence. Results Most acute care hospitals adhere to requirements for initial medical evaluations, fit testing, training, and recommended respiratory protection when in close contact with patients who have suspected or confirmed seasonal influenza. Low hospital adherence was found for respiratory protection with infectious diseases requiring airborne precautions, aerosol-generating procedures with seasonal influenza, and checking of the respirator’s user seal. Hospitals’ adherence was also low with follow-up program evaluations, medical re-evaluations, and respirator maintenance. Conclusion Efforts should be made to closely examine ways of strengthening hospitals’ RPPs to ensure the program’s ongoing effectiveness and workers’ proper selection and use of respiratory protection. Implications for improved RPPs and practice are discussed.

An online questionnaire was developed to explore respiratory protective device (RPD) prevalence in U.S. health care facilities. The survey was distributed to professional nursing society members in 2014 and again in 2015 receiving 322 and 232 participant responses, respectively. The purpose of this study was to explore if the emergency preparedness climate associated with Ebola virus disease changed the landscape of RPD use and awareness. Comparing response percentages from the two sampling time frames using bivariate analysis, no significant changes were found in types of RPDs used in health care settings. N95 filtering facepiece respirators continue to be the most prevalent RPD used in health care facilities, but powered air-purifying respirators are also popular, with regional use highest in the West and Midwest. Understanding RPD use prevalence could ensure that health care workers receive appropriate device trainings as well as improve supply matching for emergency RPD stockpiling.