Comparison of qualitative and quantitative fit-testing results for three commonly used respirators in the healthcare sector.

N95 filtering facepiece respirators are used by healthcare workers when there is a risk of exposure to airborne hazards during aerosol-generating procedures. Respirator fit-testing is required prior to use to ensure that the selected respirator provides an adequate face seal. Two common fit-test methods can be employed: qualitative fit-test (QLFT) or quantitative fit-test (QNFT). Respiratory protection standards deem both fit-tests to be acceptable. However, previous studies have indicated that fit-test results may differ between QLFT and QNFT and that the outcomes may also be influenced by the type of respirator model. The aim of this study was to determine if there is a difference in fit-test outcomes with our suite of respirators, 3M - 1860S, 1860, AND 1870, and whether the model impacts the fit-test results. Subjects were recruited from residential care facilities. Each participant was assigned a respirator and underwent sequential QLFT and QNFT fit-tests and the results (either pass or fail) were recorded. To ascertain the degree of agreement between the two fit-tests, a Kappa (Κ) statistic was conducted as per the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) respiratory protection standard. The pass-fail rates were stratified by respirator model and a Kappa statistic was calculated for each to determine effect of model on fit-test outcomes. We had 619 participants and the aggregate Κ statistic for all respirators was 0.63 which is below the suggested ANSI threshold of 0.70. There was no statistically significant difference in results when stratified by respirator model. QNFT and QLFT produced different fit-test outcomes for the three respirator models examined. The disagreement in outcomes between the two fit-test methods with our suite of N95 filtering facepiece respirators was approximately 12%. Our findings may benefit other healthcare organizations that use these three respirators.

Examining factors that influence the effectiveness of cleaning antineoplastic drugs from drug preparation surfaces: a pilot study.

Occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs has been documented to result in various adverse health effects. Despite the implementation of control measures to minimize exposure, detectable levels of drug residual are still found on hospital work surfaces. Cleaning these surfaces is considered as one means to minimize the exposure potential. However, there are no consistent guiding principles related to cleaning of contaminated surfaces resulting in hospitals to adopt varying practices. As such, this pilot study sought to evaluate current cleaning protocols and identify those factors that were most effective in reducing contamination on drug preparation surfaces. Three cleaning variables were examined: (1) type of cleaning agent (CaviCide®, Phenokil II™, bleach and chlorhexidine), (2) application method of cleaning agent (directly onto surface or indirectly onto a wipe) and (3) use of isopropyl alcohol after cleaning agent application. Known concentrations of antineoplastic drugs (either methotrexate or cyclophosphamide) were placed on a stainless steel swatch and then, systematically, each of the three cleaning variables was tested. Surface wipes were collected and quantified using high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry to determine the percent residual of drug remaining (with 100% being complete elimination of the drug). No one single cleaning agent proved to be effective in completely eliminating all drug contamination. The method of application had minimal effect on the amount of drug residual. In general, application of isopropyl alcohol after the use of cleaning agent further reduced the level of drug contamination although measureable levels of drug were still found in some cases.

Pilot assessment of the antineoplastic drug contamination levels in British Columbian hospitals pre- and post-cleaning.

OBJECTIVE: We undertook a pilot study involving six British Columbian hospital pharmacies to determine if antineoplastic drug contamination of surfaces exists and whether residual drugs remain on these surfaces despite being cleaned. METHODS: At each site, the pharmacy technician responsible for preparing the antineoplastic drugs was observed to determine which surfaces were contacted and to ascertain the frequency of contact. Surfaces observed to be most frequently contacted were subsequently wiped after drug preparation pre- and post-clean. The wipe samples were then analyzed by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry to determine the amount of contamination. Cyclophosphamide (CP) and methotrexate (MTX) were used as representative markers to reflect overall antineoplastic drug contamination levels. RESULTS: Fourteen of the 23 surfaces sampled pre-clean (61%) were contaminated with either MTX or CP. The pre-clean wipe samples had a geometric mean concentration of 0.0135 ng/cm(2) for MTX (range

Health care workers and respiratory protection: is the user seal check a surrogate for respirator fit-testing?

Many agencies recommend that health care workers wear N95 filtering facepiece respirators (N95-FFR) to minimize occupational exposure to bioaerosols, such as tuberculosis and pandemic influenza. Published standards outline procedures for the proper selection of an N95-FFR model, including user seal checks and respirator fit-testing. Some health officials have argued that the respirator fit-test step should be eliminated altogether, given its additional time and cost factors, and that only a user seal check be utilized to ensure that an adequate face seal has been achieved. One of the aims of the current study is to examine whether a user seal check is an appropriate surrogate for respirator fit-testing. Subjects were assigned an N95-FFR and asked to perform a user seal check (as per manufacturer's instructions) after which they immediately underwent a respirator fit-test. Successfully passing a respirator fit-test was based on not detecting a leakage through the face seal (either qualitatively with a test agent or quantitatively with a particulate counter). The sample population consisted of 647 subjects who had never been previously fit-tested (naive), while the remaining 137 participants were experienced respirator users. Only four of the 647 naive subjects (0.62%) identified an inadequate seal during their user seal check. Of the 643 remaining naive subjects who indicated that they had an adequate face seal prior to fit-testing, 158 (25%) failed the subsequent quantitative fit-test and 92 (14%) failed the qualitative fit-test. All 137 experienced users indicated that they had an adequate seal after performing the user seal check; however, 41 (30%) failed the subsequent quantitative fit-test, and 30 (22%) failed the qualitative fit-test. These findings contradict the argument to eliminate fit-testing and rely strictly on a user seal check to evaluate face seal.

Determinants of healthcare workers' compliance with infection control procedures.

The purpose of this study was to assess determinants of healthcare worker (HCW) self-reported compliance with infection control procedures. A survey was conducted of HCWs in 16 healthcare facilities. A strong correlation was found between both environmental and organizational factors and self-reported compliance. No relationship was found with individual factors. Only 5% of respondents rated their training in infection control as excellent, and 30% felt they were not offered the necessary training. We concluded that compliance with infection control procedures is tied to environmental factors and organizational characteristics, suggesting that efforts to improve availability of equipment and promote a safety culture are key. Training should be offered to high-risk HCWs, demonstrating an organizational commitment to their safety.

Pilot Evaluation of Dermal Contamination by Antineoplastic Drugs among Hospital Pharmacy Personnel.

BACKGROUND: It is believed that health care workers are exposed to antineoplastic drugs primarily via dermal contact. However, levels of occupational dermal contamination in Canada have not been formally investigated. OBJECTIVE: To determine the potential dermal exposure to antineoplastic drugs among hospital pharmacy personnel in a metropolitan area in British Columbia. METHODS: Six hospital pharmacies in the Vancouver area participated in this pilot study. Three pharmacy workers (a technician responsible for preparing drugs, a pharmacist responsible for checking drugs before administration, and a technician not responsible for preparing drugs but working in the pharmacy department) were selected from each site, for a total of 18 participants. Each worker's hands were wiped with a premoistened tissue (one wipe per person), and the wipes were subsequently analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry to determine levels of both cyclophosphamide and methotrexate (total of 36 analyses). RESULTS: At 3 of the 6 sites, at least one hand-wipe sample was above the analytical detection limit. Of the 18 analyses from the 3 "positive" sites, 5 (28%) had measurable levels of cyclophosphamide and methotrexate. Cyclophosphamide was detected in 3 samples (geometric mean 0.98 ng, geometric standard deviation 2.72 ng, range from below limit of detection to 3.96 ng) and methotrexate in 2 samples (geometric mean 0.27 ng, geometric standard deviation 2.57 ng, range from below limit of detection to 0.27 ng). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this pilot study suggest that hospital pharmacy workers in Metro Vancouver are probably exposed to antineoplastic drugs, given that detectable levels of drug were found on the hands of some personnel. Further studies are recommended to confirm these findings.

Conventional and sharp safety devices in 6 hospitals in British Columbia, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Reengineered sharp safety devices have been recommended to reduce occupational percutaneous injury risk in health care facilities. We conducted this study just over 1 year after passage of legislation requiring the use of sharp safety medical devices to assess the frequency of safety and conventional sharp device use and whether safety features were being activated to cover sharp points after safety devices were used and before disposal. METHODS: Approximately equal numbers of sharps disposal containers from various wards in 6 nonprofit adult and pediatric British Columbia hospitals were audited by paired research assistants, wearing protective clothing. RESULTS: In the 699 audited sharps containers, 7% (1,690/25,910) of all devices were conventional devices, specifically 2% (96/4,702) of all phlebotomy devices, 7% (1,240/17,705) of all syringes, and 10% (354/3,503) of all intravenous catheters. In addition, 94% (4,344/4,602) of all safety phlebotomy devices, 95% (2,955/3,119) of all safety intravenous devices, and 80% (13,050/16,420) of all safety syringes had been activated before disposal. CONCLUSION: More than 1 year after legislation was passed mandating the use of sharp safety devices in British Columbia hospitals, the risk from sharps remains excessive because of the ongoing use of conventional sharp devices and nonactivation of safety devices.