Assessing the filtration efficiency and regulatory status of N95s and nontraditional filtering face-piece respirators available during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has severely disrupted supply chains for many types of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), particularly surgical N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs; "masks"). As a consequence, an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) from the FDA has allowed use of industrial N95 respirators and importation of N95-type masks manufactured to international standards; these include KN95 masks from China and FFP2 masks from the European Union. METHODS: We conducted a survey of masks in the inventory of major academic medical centers in Boston, MA to determine provenance and manufacturer or supplier. We then assembled a testing apparatus at a university laboratory and performed a modified test of filtration performance using KCl and ambient particulate matter on masks from hospital inventories; an accompanying website shows how to build and use the testing apparatus. RESULTS: Over 100 different makes and models of traditional and nontraditional filtering facepiece respirators (N95-type masks) were in the inventory of surveyed U.S. teaching hospitals as opposed to 2-5 models under normal circumstances. A substantial number of unfamiliar masks are from unknown manufacturers. Many are not correctly labelled and do not perform to accepted standards and a subset are obviously dangerous; many of these masks are likely to be counterfeit. Due to the absence of publicly available information on mask suppliers and inconsistent labeling of KN95 masks, it is difficult to distinguish between legitimate and counterfeit products. CONCLUSIONS: Many FFRs available for procurement during the COVID-19 pandemic do not provide levels of fit and filtration similar to those of N95 masks and are not acceptable for use in healthcare settings. Based on these results, and in consultation with occupational health officers, we make six recommendations to assist end users in acquiring legitimate products. Institutions should always assess masks from non-traditional supply chains by checking their markings and manufacturer information against data provided by NIOSH and the latest FDA EUA Appendix A. In the absence of verifiable information on the legitimacy of mask source, institutions should consider measuring mask fit and filtration directly. We also make suggestions for regulatory agencies regarding labeling and public disclosure aimed at increasing pandemic resilience.

A Crisis-Responsive Framework for Medical Device Development Applied to the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The disruption of conventional manufacturing, supply, and distribution channels during the COVID-19 pandemic caused widespread shortages in personal protective equipment (PPE) and other medical supplies. These shortages catalyzed local efforts to use nontraditional, rapid manufacturing to meet urgent healthcare needs. Here we present a crisis-responsive design framework designed to assist with product development under pandemic conditions. The framework emphasizes stakeholder engagement, comprehensive but efficient needs assessment, rapid manufacturing, and modified product testing to enable accelerated development of healthcare products. We contrast this framework with traditional medical device manufacturing that proceeds at a more deliberate pace, discuss strengths and weakness of pandemic-responsive fabrication, and consider relevant regulatory policies. We highlight the use of the crisis-responsive framework in a case study of face shield design and production for a large US academic hospital. Finally, we make recommendations aimed at improving future resilience to pandemics and healthcare emergencies. These include continued development of open source designs suitable for rapid manufacturing, education of maker communities and hospital administrators about rapidly-manufactured medical devices, and changes in regulatory policy that help strike a balance between quality and innovation.

Analysis of SteraMist ionized hydrogen peroxide technology in the sterilization of N95 respirators and other PPE.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to widespread shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) for healthcare workers, including of N95 masks (filtering facepiece respirators; FFRs). These masks are intended for single use but their sterilization and subsequent reuse has the potential to substantially mitigate shortages. Here we investigate PPE sterilization using ionized hydrogen peroxide (iHP), generated by SteraMist equipment (TOMI; Frederick, MD), in a sealed environment chamber. The efficacy of sterilization by iHP was assessed using bacterial spores in biological indicator assemblies. After one or more iHP treatments, five models of N95 masks from three manufacturers were assessed for retention of function based on their ability to form an airtight seal (measured using a quantitative fit test) and filter aerosolized particles. Filtration testing was performed at a university lab and at a National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) pre-certification laboratory. The data demonstrate that N95 masks sterilized using SteraMist iHP technology retain filtration efficiency up to ten cycles, the maximum number tested to date. A typical iHP environment chamber with a volume of ~ 80 m3 can treat ~ 7000 masks and other items (e.g. other PPE, iPADs), making this an effective approach for a busy medical center.

Assessing the quality of nontraditional N95 filtering face-piece respirators available during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: During the current COVID-19 pandemic, supply chains for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) have been severely disrupted and many products, particularly surgical N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs; "masks") are in short supply. As a consequence, an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) from the FDA has allowed importation of N95-type masks manufactured to international standards; these include KN95 masks from China and FFP2 masks from the European Union. METHODS: We conducted a survey of mask in the inventory of major academic medical centers in Boston, MA to determine provenance and manufacturer. We then assembled a simple apparatus for performing a necessary (but not sufficient) test of filtration performance and tested masks from the inventory; an accompanying website shows how to build and use the testing apparatus. RESULTS: Our survey showed that, seven months after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, over 100 different makes and models of N95-type masks are in the inventory of local hospitals as opposed to 2-5 models under normal circumstances. A substantial number of unfamiliar masks are from unknown manufacturers. Many did not perform to accepted standards and are likely to be counterfeit. Due to the absence of publicly available information on mask suppliers in the FDA EUA and confusing or inconsistent labeling of KN95 masks, it is difficult to distinguish legitimate and counterfeit products. CONCLUSIONS: Many of the FFR masks available for procurement during the COVID-19 pandemic do not provide levels of fit and filtration similar to those of N95 masks and are not acceptable for use in healthcare settings. Based on these results, and in consultation with occupational health officers, we make six recommendations for end users to assist in acquiring legitimate products. In particular, institutions should always assess masks from non-traditional supply chains by checking their markings and manufacturer information against data provided by NIOSH and the latest FDA EUA Appendix A. In the absence of verifiable information on the legitimacy of mask source, institutions should consider measuring mask fit and filtration directly. We also make suggestions for U.S and Chinese regulatory agencies with regard to labeling and public disclosure aimed at increase pandemic resilience.

Analysis of SteraMist ionized hydrogen peroxide technology in the sterilization of N95 respirators and other PPE: a quality improvement study.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to widespread shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) for healthcare workers, including filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) such as N95 masks. These masks are normally intended for single use, but their sterilization and subsequent reuse could substantially mitigate a world-wide shortage. DESIGN: Quality assurance. SETTING: A sealed environment chamber installed in the animal facility of an academic medical center. INTERVENTIONS: One to five sterilization cycles using ionized hydrogen peroxide (iHP), generated by SteraMist equipment (TOMI; Frederick, MD). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Personal protective equipment, including five N95 mask models from three manufacturers, were evaluated for efficacy of sterilization following iHP treatment (measured with bacterial spores in standard biological indicator assemblies). Additionally, N95 masks were assessed for their ability to efficiently filter particles down to 0.3um and for their ability to form an airtight seal using a quantitative fit test. Filtration efficiency was measured using ambient particulate matter at a university lab and an aerosolized NaCl challenge at a National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) pre-certification laboratory. RESULTS: The data demonstrate that N95 masks sterilized using SteraMist iHP technology retain function up to five cycles, the maximum number tested to date. Some but not all PPE could also be sterilized using an iHP environmental chamber, but pre-treatment with a handheld iHP generator was required for semi-enclosed surfaces such as respirator hoses. CONCLUSIONS: A typical iHP environment chamber with a volume of ~80 m3 can treat ~7000 masks per day, as well as other items of PPE, making this an effective approach for a busy medical center.

Real-time prostate motion assessment: image-guidance and the temporal dependence of intra-fraction motion.

BACKGROUND: The rapid adoption of image-guidance in prostate intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) results in longer treatment times, which may result in larger intrafraction motion, thereby negating the advantage of image-guidance. This study aims to qualify and quantify the contribution of image-guidance to the temporal dependence of intrafraction motion during prostate IMRT. METHODS: One-hundred and forty-three patients who underwent conventional IMRT (n=67) or intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT/RapidArc, n=76) for localized prostate cancer were evaluated. Intrafraction motion assessment was based on continuous RL (lateral), SI (longitudinal), and AP (vertical) positional detection of electromagnetic transponders at 10 Hz. Daily motion amplitudes were reported as session mean, median, and root-mean-square (RMS) displacements. Temporal effect was evaluated by categorizing treatment sessions into 4 different classes: IMRTc (transponder only localization), IMRTcc (transponder + CBCT localization), IMATc (transponder only localization), or IMATcc (transponder + CBCT localization). RESULTS: Mean/median session times were 4.15/3.99 min (IMATc), 12.74/12.19 min (IMATcc), 5.99/5.77 min (IMRTc), and 12.98/12.39 min (IMRTcc), with significant pair-wise difference (p<0.0001) between all category combinations except for IMRTcc vs. IMATcc (p>0.05). Median intrafraction motion difference between CBCT and non-CBCT categories strongly correlated with time for RMS (t-value=17.29; p<0.0001), SI (t-value=-4.25; p<0.0001), and AP (t-value=2.76; p<0.0066), with a weak correlation for RL (t-value=1.67; p=0.0971). Treatment time reduction with non-CBCT treatment categories showed reductions in the observed intrafraction motion: systematic error (Σ)<0.6 mm and random error (σ)<1.2 mm compared with ≤0.8 mm and <1.6 mm, respectively, for CBCT-involved treatment categories. CONCLUSIONS: For treatment durations >4-6 minutes, and without any intrafraction motion mitigation protocol in place, patient repositioning is recommended, with at least the acquisition of the lateral component of an orthogonal image pair in the absence of volumetric imaging.