Method for Testing the Bacteriological Efficiency of Surgical Masks in the Operating-Theatre

Freake, R; L, Abbott

doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(66)92366-x

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many factors affect mask efficiency besides design. These are more difficult to control and include the sex of the wearer, skin type, the degree of facial hair, the effect of shaving on exfoliation, skin and mucous membrane microflora, mask fit and wearing style and the effect of conversation, coughing, sneezing and sweating 1,3,8−11 . The contribution of these variables to the incidence of postoperative infection is difficult to determine as it is almost impossible to control all of them at any one time; however, it is thought that, in conjunction with mask movement, they may be important contributors to wound infection 9,11,12 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical masks: operative field contamination following visor‐to‐visor contact

Cocciolone

Tristram

Hewitt

2004

ANZ Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical masks: operative field contamination following visor‐to‐visor contact

Cocciolone

Tristram

Hewitt

2004

ANZ Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Filtration Efficiency of Surgical Masks: A New Method of Evaluation

Rubbo

1968

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

An investigation into the efficiency of disposable face masks.

Rogers¹

1980

J Clin Pathol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY Disposable face masks used in hospitals have been assessed for the protection afforded the patient and the wearer by challenges of simulated natural conditions of stress. Operating theatre masks made of synthetic materials allow the wearer to breathe through the masks, and these have been shown to protect the patient well but the wearer slightly less. Cheaper paper masks are worn for ward duties, and of these only the Promask protected the area in front of the wearer: air does not pass through this mask, expired air is prevented from passing forward, and the wearer breathes unfiltered air. All the other paper masks tested allowed many bacteria-laden particles to pass through them.Masks are worn for fewer ward procedures than 20 years ago, but most nursing authorities still recommend their use on the wards during the performance of many aseptic techniques even though this may be unnecessary.' If they are used they must provide the safeguard for which they are worn, which is to prevent the nasopharyngeal organisms of the wearer infecting a patient. In a study spread over three years, nasopharyngeal carrier rates of Staphylococcus aureus varied between 29%0 and 42% among personnel in an operating suite, and it has been noted how many times people touch their noses and thus contaminate their hands.3Masks worn by hospital staff to restrict the flow of potential pathogens from their mouths or noses are of two types, both of which are disposable. Those used during minor procedures, such as wound dressings, are usually made of paper and are not suitable for the prolonged wear necessary in an operating theatre, where more expensive masks made of one of various synthetic materials are worn; these should fit snugly over the face and cover the mouth and nose so that the wearer breathes filtered air in and out freely.

show abstract

Method for Testing the Bacteriological Efficiency of Surgical Masks in the Operating-Theatre

Cited by 4 publications

References 3 publications

Surgical masks: operative field contamination following visor‐to‐visor contact

Surgical masks: operative field contamination following visor‐to‐visor contact

Filtration Efficiency of Surgical Masks: A New Method of Evaluation

An investigation into the efficiency of disposable face masks.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About