Short Communication: Health Interventions in Volcanic Eruptions—Community Wearability Assessment of Respiratory Protection against Volcanic Ash from Mt Sinabung, Indonesia

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction

Rachmawati

et al. 2019

Self Cite

Communities living near active volcanoes may be exposed to respiratory hazards from volcanic ash. Understanding their perception of the risks and the actions they take to mitigate against those risks is important for developing effective communication strategies. To investigate this issue, the first comparative study of risk perceptions and use of respiratory protection was conducted on 2003 residents affected by active volcanoes from three countries: Japan (Sakurajima volcano), Indonesia (Merapi and Kelud volcanoes) and Mexico (Popocatépetl volcano). The study was designed to test the explanatory value of a theoretical framework which hypothesized that use of respiratory protection (i.e., facemask) would be motivated by two cognitive constructs from protection motivation theory: threat appraisal (i.e., perceptions of harm/ worry about ash inhalation) and coping appraisal (i.e., beliefs about mask efficacy). Using structural equation modelling (SEM), important differences in the predictive ability of the constructs were found between countries. For example, perceptions of harm/ worry were stronger predictors of mask use in Japan and Indonesia than they were in Mexico where beliefs about mask efficacy were more important. The SEM also identified differences in the demographic variants of mask use in each country and how they were mediated by the cognitive constructs. Findings such as these highlight the importance of contextualising our understanding of protection motivation and, thus, the value of developing targeted approaches to promote precautionary behaviour.

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors motivating the use of respiratory protection against volcanic ashfall: A comparative analysis of communities in Japan, Indonesia and Mexico

Covey

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction

Rachmawati

et al. 2019

Self Cite

“…A perception of difficulty in breathing was a factor causing the children to remove facemasks. Previous studies have also found that perceptions of increased breathing resistance reduces the wearability of facemasks in adults [20,27,28]. In this study, for all masks, breathability was one of the lowest rated wearability criteria (i.e., the children perceived the masks to negatively affect their ability to breathe).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 51%

“…To our knowledge, this is the only assessment of comfort of facemasks for children, prior to this study, and it should be noted that the study was commissioned and funded by the manufacturer of the masks. Galea et al (2018) conducted a study with adults in Indonesia, testing the wearability of facemasks used as protection against volcanic ash, including N95 masks and surgical masks [20]. Results highlighted some wearability barriers to the uptake of some facemasks which included perceptions of poor fit, comfort and breathability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of the Wearability of Facemasks against Air Pollution in Primary School-Aged Children in London

Smart¹,

Smart

et al. 2020

IJERPH

Air pollution is a major health problem and children are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects. Facemasks are one form of protection but, to be effective, they need to filter out airborne pollutants, fit the face well and be wearable. In this pilot study, we assess the perceived wearability of three facemasks (Vogmask, TuHao and ReSpimask) marketed in the UK as being designed to protect children against exposure to air pollution. Twenty-four primary school children wore each facemask during a standardised walking and running activity. After each activity, the children were asked to rate facemask wearability in terms of parameters, such as perceived comfort, hotness, breathability and fit. At the end of the trial, the children compared and identified their preferred facemask. The main complaint about the facemasks was the children’s faces being too hot. The ReSpimask was most frequently reported as being perceived to be the hardest to breathe through. The TuHao facemask was the only adjustable strap mask assessed but was reported to be difficult to adjust. Facemasks with a nose clip were frequently rated highest for fit (TuHao and Vogmask). The patterned, cloth fabric Vogmask had significantly higher ratings for appearance and perceived fit. The results show children’s perceptions of facemasks are highly affected by the facemask’s design, hotness and perceived breathability. By making children’s facemasks more appealing, breathable, cooler and improving their fit, wearability may be improved.

“…The evidence also indicates that some facemasks are perceived by those who wear them as being more wearable than others, therefore likely affecting uptake. 15,16…”

Section: Facemasksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A close-fitting mask (ie, an industrial N95 style mask) may pose additional risks for people with respiratory or cardiac conditions or claustrophobia. 5,15,16 Such information is already available for some types of exposures, such as to volcanic ash. 28 The information needs to be evidence-based so that potential users are not misled about the level of protection that a facemask can or cannot provide.…”

Section: Choice Of Maskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Air Pollution Disasters: Liability Issues in Negligence Associated With the Provision of Personal Protective Interventions (Facemasks)

McDonald

Disaster med. public health prep.

2020

Disasters may impact air quality through the generation of high levels of potentially pathogenic particulate matter (PM), for example, in a volcanic eruption. Depending on the concentrations of particles in the air, their size and composition, and the duration of exposure, high levels of PM can create significant public health issues. It has been argued that air pollution, in and of itself, is a public health crisis. One possible intervention to reduce exposure to high levels of PM during an air pollution disaster (APD) is using facemasks. However, agencies may be reluctant to recommend or distribute facemasks for community use during APDs for a variety of reasons, including concerns about liability. There has been no analysis of these concerns. This paper analyzes whether agencies may have a legal duty of care in negligence to provide warnings about the health risks associated with APDs and/or to recommend facemasks as a protective mechanism for community use to reduce exposure to PM. It is also the first to examine the potential for liability in negligence, when a decision is made to distribute facemasks for community use during an APD and the receiver alleges that they sustained a personal injury and seeks compensation.