Impact of personal protective equipment attached powered air-purifying respirator on nursing-skill performance and psychosocial stress of intensive care unit COVID-19 nurses: A cross-sectional study.

AIM: To investigate how personal protective equipment with an attached powered air-purifying respirator worn by intensive care unit nurses caring for COVID-19 patients in Korea impacts nursing-skill performance and psychosocial stress. DESIGN: A cross-sectional descriptive study was designed using purposive sampling. REVIEW METHODS: Online data collection was conducted from 3 March 2021-20 March 2021on 181 nurses who had worked for more than 1 month in COVID-19 critical care settings wearing personal protective equipment with a powered air-purifying respirator. A structured questionnaire was used to gather data on sociodemographic characteristics, attitude toward personal protective equipment, nursing-skill performance wearing personal protective equipment and psychosocial stress. DATA SOURCES: Data was sourced from structured questionnaire responses. RESULTS: Nursing skill performance decreased to 63.4%, compared with normal performance. Subjects' perceptions and attitudes related to PPE scored 3.56 out of 5; 44.7% of subjects reported severe psychosocial stress, which was significantly affected by attitude toward personal protective equipment usage, nursing performance, experience caring for COVID-19 patients and length of personal protective equipment usage per shift. CONCLUSION: Greater negative attitude toward usage of personal protective equipment with a powered air-purifying respirator, results in lower nursing-skill performance and higher the psychosocial stress of nurses responding to COVID-19 outbreaks. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: High negative attitude toward PPE and low nursing-skill performance due to PPE with an attached PAPR results in significant and debilitating psychosocial stress in ICU nurses responding to COVID-19 outbreaks. To respond effectively to future infectious disease outbreaks and improve nursing performance, minimising the inconvenience and restrictions experienced by nurses wearing personal protective equipment is critical. REPORTING METHOD: We adhered to relevant EQUATOR guidelines to report. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Short-term effects of the toxic component of traffic-related air pollution (TRAP) on lung function in healthy adults using a powered air purifying respirator (PAPR).

Short-term exposure to traffic-related air pollution (TRAP) are associated with reduced lung function. However, TRAP is a mixture of various gaseous pollutants and particulate matter (PM), and therefore it is unknown that which components of TRAP are responsible for the respiratory toxicity. Using a powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR), we conducted a randomized, double-blind, crossover trial in which 40 adults were exposed to TRAP for 2 h at the sidewalk of a busy road. During the exposure, the participants wore the PAPR fitted with a PM filter, a PM and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) filter, or a sham filter (no filtration, Sham mode). The participants were blinded to the type of filter in their PAPR, and experienced three exposures, once for each intervention mode in random order. We measured two lung function measures (forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1] and forced vital capacity [FVC]) and an airway inflammation marker (fraction of exhaled nitric oxide [FENO]) before and immediately after each exposure, and further measured them at different time periods after exposure. We applied linear mixed effect models to estimate the effects of the interventions on the changes of lung function from baseline values after controlling for other covariates. Compared to baseline, exposing to TRAP decreased FEV1 and FVC, and increased FEV1/FVC and FENO in all three intervention modes. The mixed models showed that with the sham mode as reference, lung function and airway inflammation post exposure were significantly improved by filtering both PM and VOCs, but marginally affected by filtering only PM. In conclusion, the VOCs component of TRAP is responsible for the reduction in lung function caused by short-term exposure to TRAP. However, the result needs to be interpreted cautiously before further verified by laboratory experiment using purely isolated component(s) of TRAP.

Efficacy of cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance while wearing a powered air-purifying respirator.

BACKGROUND: The use of personal protective equipment for respiratory infection control during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a physical burden to healthcare providers. The duration for which CPR quality according to recommended guidelines can be maintained under these circumstances is important. We investigated whether a 2-min shift was appropriate for chest compression and determined the duration for which chest compression was maintained in accordance with the recommended guidelines while wearing personal protective equipment. METHODS: This prospective crossover simulation study was performed at a single center from September 2020 to October 2020. Five indicators of CPR quality were measured during the first and second sessions of the study period. All participants wore a Level D powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR), and the experiment was conducted using a Resusci Anne manikin, which can measure the quality of chest compressions. Each participant conducted two sessions. In Session 1, the sequence of 2 min of chest compressions, followed by a 2-min rest, was repeated twice; in Session 2, the sequence of 1-min chest compressions followed by a 1-min rest was repeated four times. RESULTS: All 34 participants completed the study. The sufficiently deep compression rate was 65.9 ± 31.1% in the 1-min shift group and 61.5 ± 30.5% in the 2-min shift group. The mean compression depth was 52.8 ± 4.3 mm in the 1-min shift group and 51.0 ± 6.1 mm in the 2-min shift group. These two parameters were significantly different between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the other values related to CPR quality. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicated that 1 min of chest compressions with a 1-min rest maintained a better quality of CPR while wearing a PAPR.

Exploring healthcare workers' perspectives of video feedback for training in the use of powered air purifying respirators (PAPR) at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: With the advent of COVID-19, many healthcare workers (HWs) in Australia requested access to powered air purifying respirators (PAPR) for improved respiratory protection, comfort and visibility. The urgency of the response at our hospital required rapid deployment of innovative training to ensure the safe use of PAPRs, in particular, a video-feedback training option to prepare HWs for PAPR competency. AIM: To explore the feasibility, acceptability, and utility of video-feedback in PAPR training and competency assessment. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 HWs, including clinicians from Intensive Care, Anaesthetics and Respiratory Medicine, at a large teaching hospital in Australia. FINDINGS: Participants believed that the use of video-feedback in PAPR training was feasible, acceptable and useful. They described a variety of benefits to learning and retention, from a variety of ways in which they engaged with the personal video-feedback. Participants also described the impact of reviewing personalised practice footage, compared to generic footage of an ideal performance. CONCLUSION: By conceptualising video-feedback using a pedagogical approach, this study contributes to knowledge around optimising methods for training HWs in PPE use, particularly when introducing a new and complex PPE device during an infectious disease outbreak.

Carbon dioxide increases with face masks but remains below short-term NIOSH limits.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: COVID-19 pandemic led to wide-spread use of face-masks, respirators and other personal protective equipment (PPE) by healthcare workers. Various symptoms attributed to the use of PPE are believed to be, at least in part, due to elevated carbon-dioxide (CO2) levels. We evaluated concentrations of CO2 under various PPE. METHODS: In a prospective observational study on healthy volunteers, CO2 levels were measured during regular breathing while donning 1) no mask, 2) JustAir® powered air purifying respirator (PAPR), 3) KN95 respirator, and 4) valved-respirator. Serial CO2 measurements were taken with a nasal canula at a frequency of 1-Hz for 15-min for each PPE configuration to evaluate whether National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) limits were breached. RESULTS: The study included 11 healthy volunteers, median age 32 years (range 16-54) and 6 (55%) men. Percent mean (SD) changes in CO2 values for no mask, JustAir® PAPR, KN95 respirator and valve respirator were 0.26 (0.12), 0.59 (0.097), 2.6 (0.14) and 2.4 (0.59), respectively. Use of face masks (KN95 and valved-respirator) resulted in significant increases in CO2 concentrations, which exceeded the 8-h NIOSH exposure threshold limit value-weighted average (TLV-TWA). However, the increases in CO2 concentrations did not breach short-term (15-min) limits. Importantly, these levels were considerably lower than the long-term (8-h) NIOSH limits during donning JustAir® PAPR. There was a statistically significant difference between all pairs (p < 0.0001, except KN95 and valved-respirator (p = 0.25). However, whether increase in CO2 levels are clinically significant remains debatable. CONCLUSION: Although, significant increase in CO2 concentrations are noted with routinely used face-masks, the levels still remain within the NIOSH limits for short-term use. Therefore, there should not be a concern in their regular day-to-day use for healthcare providers. The clinical implications of elevated CO2 levels with long-term use of face masks needs further studies. Use of PAPR prevents relative hypercapnoea. However, whether PAPR should be advocated for healthcare workers requiring PPE for extended hours needs to evaluated in further studies.

Headache Related to PPE Use during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Personal protection equipment (PPE)-associated headache is an unusual secondary headache disorder that predominantly occurs in healthcare workers as a consequence of the donning of protective respirators, face masks and/or eyewear. The appreciation of this entity is important given the significant ramifications upon the occupational health of healthcare workers and could additionally have an impact on persons living with pre-existing headache disorder(s). RECENT FINDINGS: There has been a renewed interest and recognition of PPE-associated headaches amongst healthcare professionals, largely brought about by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic which has besieged healthcare systems worldwide. De novo PPE-associated headaches may present with migrainous or tension-type features and can be viewed as a subtype of external compression headache. The prognosis of the disorder is generally favourable, given that most headaches are short-lived without long-term sequalae. Several aetiologies have been postulated to account for the development of these headaches. Notably, these headaches can affect the occupational health and work performance of healthcare workers. In this review, we discuss the epidemiology, clinical characteristics, probable etiopathogenesis, management and prognosis of PPE-associated headaches in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Future directions for research and PPE development are proposed.

Impact of Personal Protective Equipment on Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Resuscitation in Coronavirus Pandemic.

Background and Objectives: This retrospective study evaluated the clinical impact of enhanced personal protective equipment (PPE) on the clinical outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Moreover, by focusing on the use of a powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR), we investigated the medical personnel's perceptions of wearing PAPR during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Materials and Methods: According to the arrival time at the emergency department, the patients were categorized into a conventional PPE group (1 August 2019 to 20 January 2020) and an enhanced PPE group (21 January 2020, to 31 August 2020). The primary outcomes of this analysis were the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) rate. Additionally, subjective perception of the medical staff regarding the effect of wearing enhanced PPE during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was evaluated by conducting a survey. Results: This study included 130 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients, with 73 and 57 patients in the conventional and enhanced PPE groups, respectively. The median time intervals to first intubation and to report the first arterial blood gas analysis results were longer in the enhanced PPE group than in the conventional PPE group (3 min vs. 2 min; p = 0.020 and 8 min vs. 3 min; p < 0.001, respectively). However, there were no significant differences in the ROSC rate (odds ratio (OR) = 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38-1.67; p = 0.542) and 1 month survival (OR 0.38, 95% CI: 0.07-2.10; p = 0.266) between the two groups. In total, 67 emergent department (ED) professionals responded to the questionnaire. Although a significant number of respondents experienced inconveniences with PAPR use, they agreed that PAPR was necessary during the CPR procedure for protection and reduction of infection transmission. Conclusion: The use of enhanced PPE, including PAPR, affected the performance of CPR to some extent but did not alter patient outcomes. PAPR use during the resuscitation of OHCA patients might positively impact the psychological stability of the medical staff.

Aerosol Generation During Bone-Sawing Procedures in Veterinary Autopsies.

Bone-sawing procedures are routinely performed during veterinary and human autopsies and represent an important source for infectious aerosols. Here we investigate the generation of aerosols during bone-sawing procedures using 5 different saws regularly used in veterinary and human pathology. In particular, the electrical bone band saw produced vast amounts of aerosolized particles less than 5 µm in diameter, which spread rapidly throughout the entire autopsy hall, leading to an exposure of all personnel. Other sawing devices tested were a diamond-coated cut grinder, an oscillating saw, a reciprocating saw, and a hand bone saw. Although these saws, especially the handsaw, generated fewer aerosolized particles than the band saw, the level of exposure of the saw operator would still be of concern in cases where infectious material would require sawing. Contamination of the entire autopsy area was successfully prevented by the construction of a separately ventilated sawing cabin inside the existing autopsy room. Saw operators in this cabin, however, were exposed to even higher aerosol concentrations. Protection of saw operators was achieved by using a powered air-purifying respirator. In conclusion, our results demonstrate that all bone-sawing procedures applied in veterinary and human pathology can generate aerosols that are of concern for the health of autopsy personnel. To reduce the risk of aerosol infections from bone-sawing procedures, efficient and properly designed ventilation systems to limit the spread of aerosols and appropriate personal protective equipment against aerosols for exposed personnel should be implemented.

Effects of a powered air-purifying respirator intervention on indium exposure reduction and indium related biomarkers among ITO sputter target manufacturing workers.

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) worn by the workers, and to investigate the effect of this application on exposure and preclinical effects in terms of workplace measuring and biomarker monitoring in ITO sputter target manufacturing plants and workers, respectively. Fifty-four workers were recruited and investigated from 2010-2012, during which PAPRs were provided to on-site workers in September 2011. Each worker completed questionnaires and provided blood and urine samples for analysis of biomarkers of indium exposure and preclinical effects. Area and personal indium air samples were randomly collected from selected worksites and from participants. The penetration percentage of the respirator (concentration inside respirator divided by concentration outside respirator) was 6.6%. Some biomarkers, such as S-In, SOD, GPx, GST, MDA, and TMOM, reflected the decrease in exposure and showed lower levels, after implementation of PAPRs. This study is the first to investigate the efficacy of PAPRs for reducing indium exposure. The measurement results clearly showed that the implementation of PAPRs reduces levels of indium-related biomarkers. These findings have practical applications for minimizing occupational exposure to indium and for managing the health of workers exposed to indium.

Performance of an improperly sized and stretched-out loose-fitting powered air-purifying respirator: Manikin-based study.

The objective of this study was to investigate the protection level offered by a Powered Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) equipped with an improperly sized or stretched-out loose-fitting facepiece using constant and cyclic flow conditions. Improperly sized PAPR facepieces of two models as well as a stretched-out facepiece were tested. These facepieces were examined in two versions: with and without exhaust holes. Loose-fitting facepieces (size "large") were donned on a small manikin headform and challenged with sodium chloride (NaCl) aerosol particles in an exposure chamber. Four cyclic flows with mean inspiratory flows (MIFs) of 30, 55, 85, and 135 L/min were applied using an electromechanical Breathing Recording and Simulation System (BRSS). The manikin Fit Factor (mFF) was determined as the ratio of aerosol concentrations outside (Cout) to inside (Cin) of the facepiece, measured with a P-Trak condensation particle counter (CPC). Results showed that the mFF decreased exponentially with increasing MIF. The mFF values of the stretched-out facepiece were significantly lower than those obtained for the undamaged ones. Facepiece type and MIF were found to significantly affect the performance of the loose-fitting PAPR. The effect of the exhaust holes was less pronounced and depended on the facepiece type. It was concluded that an improperly sized facepiece might potentially offer relatively low protection (mFF < 250) at high to strenuous workloads. The testing was also performed at a constant inhalation flow to explore the mechanism of the particle-facepiece interaction. Results obtained with cyclic flow pattern were consistent with the data generated when testing the loose-fitting PAPR under constant flow conditions. The time-weighted average values of mFF calculated from the measurements conducted under the constant flow regime were capable of predicting the protection under cyclic flow regime. The findings suggest that program administrators need to equip employees with properly sized facepieces and remove stretched-out ones from workplace. Manufacturers should emphasize the importance of proper sizing with their user instructions.

Intubation Efficiency and Perceived Ease of Use of Video Laryngoscopy vs Direct Laryngoscopy While Wearing HazMat PPE: A Preliminary High-fidelity Mannequin Study.

INTRODUCTION: Management of contaminated patients in the decontamination corridor requires the use of hazardous material (HazMat) personal protective equipment (PPE). Previous studies have demonstrated that HazMat PPE may increase the difficulty of airway management. This study compared the efficiency of video laryngoscopy (VL) with traditional direct laryngoscopy (DL) during endotracheal intubation (ETI) while wearing HazMat PPE. METHODS: Post-graduate year (PGY) 1-3 Emergency Medicine residents were randomized to VL or DL while wearing encapsulating PPE. Video laryngoscopy was performed using the GlideScope Cobalt AVL video laryngoscope. The primary outcome measure was time to successful ETI in a high-fidelity simulation mannequin. Three time points were utilized in the analysis: Time 0 (blade at lips), Time 1 (blade removed from lips after endotracheal tube placement), and Time 2 (bag valve mask [BVM] attached to endotracheal tube). Secondary outcome measures were perceived ease of use and feasibility of VL and DL ETI modalities. RESULTS: Twenty-one of 23 (91.3%) eligible residents participated. Mean time to ETI was 10.0 seconds (SD=5.3 seconds) in the DL group and 7.8 seconds (SD=3.0 seconds) in the VL group (P=.081). Mean times from blade insertion until BVM attachment were 17.4 seconds (SD=6.0 seconds) and 15.6 seconds (SD=4.6 seconds), respectively (P=.30). There were no unsuccessful intubation attempts. Seventeen out of 20 participants (85.0%) perceived VL to be easier to use when performing ETI in PPE. Twelve out of 20 participants (60%) perceived DL to be more feasible in an actual HazMat scenario. CONCLUSION: The time to successful ETI was not significantly different between VL and DL. Video laryngoscopy had a greater perceived ease of use, but DL was perceived to be more feasible for use in actual HazMat situations. These findings suggest that both DL and VL are reasonable modalities for use in HazMat situations, and the choice of modality could be based on the clinical situation and provider experience.

Guidelines in Practice: Sterile Technique.

Sterile technique is the collective actions taken to reduce potential contaminants in the OR and maintain a sterile field during operative or other invasive procedures. Practicing and applying the principles of sterile technique is a cornerstone of perioperative nursing and providing safe patient care. The recently updated AORN "Guideline for sterile technique" provides perioperative nurses with information on the principles of and processes associated with sterile technique. This article provides an overview of the guideline and discusses recommendations for actions to take before preparing the sterile field, while preparing and maintaining the sterile field, for limiting movement, for surgical wound classification, and for quality. It also includes a scenario describing the implementation of isolation technique (ie, clean closure) for colon procedures. Perioperative nurses should review the guideline in its entirety and apply the recommendations when practicing sterile technique.

An Engineering Alternative to Lockdown During COVID-19 and Other Airborne Infectious Disease Pandemics: Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Now and in the future, airborne diseases such as COVID-19 could become uncontrollable and lead the world into lockdowns. Finding alternatives to lockdowns, which limit individual freedoms and cause enormous economic losses, is critical. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of achieving a society or a nation that does not require lockdown during a pandemic due to airborne infectious diseases through the mass production and distribution of high-performance, low-cost, and comfortable powered air purifying respirators (PAPRs). METHODS: The feasibility of a social system using PAPR as an alternative to lockdown was examined from the following perspectives: first, what PAPRs can do as an alternative to lockdown; second, how to operate a social system utilizing PAPR; third, directions of improvement of PAPR as an alternative to lockdown; and finally, balancing between efficiency of infection control and personal freedom through the use of Internet of Things (IoT). RESULTS: PAPR was shown to be a possible alternative to lockdown through the reduction of airborne and droplet transmissions and through a temporary reduction of infection probability per contact. A social system in which individual constraints imposed by lockdown are replaced by PAPRs was proposed, and an example of its operation is presented in this paper. For example, the government determines the type and intensity of the lockdown and activates it. At that time, the government will also indicate how PAPR can be substituted for the different activity and movement restrictions imposed during a lockdown, for example, a curfew order may be replaced with the permission to go outside if wearing a PAPR. The following 7 points were raised as directions for improvement of PAPR as an alternative method to lockdown: flow optimization, precise differential pressure control, design improvement, maintenance method, variation development such as booth type, information terminal function, and performance evaluation method. In order to achieve the effectiveness and efficiency in controlling the spread of infection and the individual freedom at a high level in a social system that uses PAPRs as an alternative to lockdown, it was considered effective to develop a PAPR wearing rate network management system utilizing IoT. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that using PAPR with infection control ability and with less economic and social damage as an alternative to nationwide lockdown is possible during a pandemic due to airborne infectious diseases. Further, the efficiency of the government's infection control and each citizen's freedom can be balanced by using the PAPR wearing rate network management system utilizing an IoT system.

Comparison of respiratory protection during exercise tasks between different methods of wearing replaceable particulate respirators and powered air-purifying respirators.

This study evaluated the differences in respiratory protection between replaceable particulate respirators (RPRs) and powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) based on different wearing methods during exercise tasks. Ten participants wore RPRs and PAPRs alternately in ways comparable to those adopted by workers in actual workplaces. We measured the fit factor of the respiratory protective equipment (RPE) during exercise tasks for each wearing variation. The exercise load was set to 80W using an ergometer. The exercise tasks comprised five actions described in the Japan Industrial Standard T8150 in 2018. We compared the results with experimental data obtained at rest in our previous studies. The fit factor of RPRs during exercise was significantly lower than (p<0.001) and about half that measured at rest, indicating inadequate respiratory protection. On the other hand, the fit factor of PAPRs during exercise tasks was also significantly lower than (p<0.001) and about half that at rest, but respiratory protection was maintained. This suggests that the protection provided by PAPRs is independent of wearing method during exercise. PAPRs may thus be better than RPRs for workers who have to wear RPE inappropriately due to health problems.

Validation of personal protective equipment ensembles, incorporating powered air-purifying respirators protected from contamination, for the care of patients with high-consequence infectious diseases.

BACKGROUND: The UK High-Consequence Infectious Diseases (HCID) Network of high-level isolation units provides care for patients with contact- or airborne-transmissible highly infectious and highly dangerous diseases. In most HCID units, the healthcare workers (HCWs) wear personal protective equipment (PPE) ensembles incorporating a powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) for head and respiratory protection. Some PAPRs have components worn outside/over other PPE, necessitating decontamination of re-usable elements. Two alternative PAPRs, with all re-usable elements worn under PPE, were trialled in this study. AIM: To undertake scenario-based testing of PAPRs and PPE to determine usability, comfort and ability to remove contaminated PPE without personal cross-contamination. METHODS: Trained healthcare volunteers (N=20) wearing PAPR/PPE ensembles were sprayed with ultraviolet fluorescent markers. They undertook exercises to mimic patient care, and subsequently, after doffing the contaminated PPE following an established protocol, any personal cross-contamination was visualized under ultraviolet light. Participants also completed a questionnaire to gauge how comfortable they found the PPE. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The ensembles were tested under extreme 'worst case scenario' conditions, augmented by physical and manual dexterity tests. Participating volunteers considered the exercise to be beneficial in terms of training and PPE evaluation. Data obtained, including feedback from questionnaires and doffing buddy observations, supported evidence-based decisions on the PAPR/PPE ensemble to be adopted by the HCID Network. One cross-contamination event was recorded in the ensemble chosen; this could be attributed to doffing error, and could therefore be eliminated with further practice.

A Personal Respirator to Improve Protection for Healthcare Workers Treating COVID-19 (PeRSo).

Introduction: SARS-CoV-2 infection is a global pandemic. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) to protect healthcare workers has been a recurrent challenge in terms of global stocks, supply logistics and suitability. In some settings, around 20% of healthcare workers treating COVID-19 cases have become infected, which leads to staff absence at peaks of the pandemic, and in some cases mortality. Methods: To address shortcomings in PPE, we developed a simple powered air purifying respirator, made from inexpensive and widely available components. The prototype was designed to minimize manufacturing complexity so that derivative versions could be developed in low resource settings with minor modification. Results: The "Personal Respirator - Southampton" (PeRSo) delivers High-Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filtered air from a battery powered fan-filter assembly into a lightweight hood with a clear visor that can be comfortably worn for several hours. Validation testing demonstrates that the prototype removes microbes, avoids excessive CO2 build-up in normal use, and passes fit test protocols widely used to evaluate standard N95/FFP2 and N99/FFP3 face masks. Feedback from doctors and nurses indicate the PeRSo prototype was preferred to standard FFP2 and FFP3 masks, being more comfortable and reducing the time and risk of recurrently changing PPE. Patients report better communication and reassurance as the entire face is visible. Conclusion: Rapid upscale of production of cheaply produced powered air purifying respirators, designed to achieve regulatory approval in the country of production, could protect healthcare workers from infection and improve healthcare delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Time to intubation with McGrath™ videolaryngoscope versus direct laryngoscope in powered air-purifying respirator: a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, multiple guidelines have recommended the videolaryngoscope for tracheal intubation. However, there is no evidence that videolaryngoscope reduces time to tracheal intubation, which is important for COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure. METHODS: To simulate intubation of COVID-19 patients, we randomised 28 elective surgical patients to be intubated with either the McGrath™ MAC videolaryngoscope or the direct laryngoscope by specialist anaesthetists donning 3M™ Jupiter™ powered air-purifying respirators (PAPR) and N95 masks. Primary outcome was time to intubation. RESULTS: The median (IQR) times to intubation were 61s (37-63 s) and 41.5s (37-56 s) in the videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope groups respectively (p = 0.35). The closest mean (SD) distances between the anaesthetist and the patient during intubation were 21.6 cm (4.8 cm) and 17.6 cm (5.3 cm) in the videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope groups, respectively (p = 0.045). There were no significant differences in the median intubation difficulty scale scores, proportion of successful intubation at first laryngoscopic attempt and proportion of intubations requiring adjuncts. Intubations for all the patients were successful with no adverse event. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in the time to intubation by specialist anaesthetists who were donned in PAPR and N95 masks on elective surgical patients with either the McGrath™ videolaryngoscope or direct laryngoscope. The distance between the anaesthetist and patient was significantly further with the videolaryngoscope. The direct laryngoscope could be an equal alternative to videolaryngoscope for specialist anaesthetists when resources are limited or disrupted due to the pandemic.

Powered air-purifying respirators used during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic significantly reduce speech perception.

BACKGROUND: Due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, interventions in the upper airways are considered high-risk procedures for otolaryngologists and their colleagues. The purpose of this study was to evaluate limitations in hearing and communication when using a powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) system to protect against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission and to assess the benefit of a headset. METHODS: Acoustic properties of the PAPR system were measured using a head and torso simulator. Audiological tests (tone audiometry, Freiburg speech test, Oldenburg sentence test (OLSA)) were performed in normal-hearing subjects (n = 10) to assess hearing with PAPR. The audiological test setup also included simulation of conditions in which the target speaker used either a PAPR, a filtering face piece (FFP) 3 respirator, or a surgical face mask. RESULTS: Audiological measurements revealed that sound insulation by the PAPR headtop and noise, generated by the blower-assisted respiratory protection system, resulted in significantly deteriorated hearing thresholds (4.0 ± 7.2 dB hearing level (HL) vs. 49.2 ± 11.0 dB HL, p < 0.001) and speech recognition scores in quiet (100.0 ± 0.0% vs. 2.5 ± 4.2%, p < 0.001; OLSA: 20.8 ± 1.8 dB vs. 61.0 ± 3.3 dB SPL, p < 0.001) when compared to hearing without PAPR. Hearing with PAPR was significantly improved when the subjects were equipped with an in-ear headset (p < 0.001). Sound attenuation by FFP3 respirators and surgical face masks had no clinically relevant impact on speech perception. CONCLUSIONS: The PAPR system evaluated here can be considered for high-risk procedures in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients, provided that hearing and communication of the surgical team are optimized by the additional use of a headset.