Correlation Engine 2.0
Clear Search sequence regions


  • acls (3)
  • aerosol (5)
  • airflow (1)
  • APF (9)
  • asthma (1)
  • bypass enter (1)
  • centers disease control (1)
  • collect data (1)
  • community (1)
  • conflicts interest (1)
  • coronavirus (1)
  • dead (1)
  • disease and (1)
  • emergency (7)
  • factors (3)
  • flow (18)
  • heart (4)
  • heart disease (1)
  • help (1)
  • impair (1)
  • KALS (1)
  • KALS 1 (1)
  • korea (1)
  • manikin (7)
  • mass (3)
  • mouth (1)
  • normal (2)
  • nose (1)
  • nurses (1)
  • outbreaks (2)
  • overweight (1)
  • patients (7)
  • peak flow rate (1)
  • problems (7)
  • quality data (1)
  • research (2)
  • safety (6)
  • sodium (1)
  • south korea (1)
  • sputum (1)
  • suggest (2)
  • toxic (1)
  • underweight (1)
  • volunteers (1)
  • world health (2)
  • Sizes of these terms reflect their relevance to your search.

    The application of appropriate personal protective equipment for respiratory protection to health care workers is a cornerstone for providing safe healthcare in emergency departments. We investigated the protective effect and usefulness of loose-fitting powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) during chest compression. This was a single-center simulation study performed from May 2019 to July 2019 in a tertiary hospital. We measured the concentrations of ambient aerosol and particles inside the loose-fitting PAPR during chest compression, and this ratio was set as the simulated workplace protecting factor (SWPF). According to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health regulations, the assigned protection factor (APF) of loose-fitting PAPRs is 25. Thus, the loose-fitting PAPRs were assumed to have a protective effect when the SWPF were ≥ 250 (APF × 10). We measured the SWPF of PAPR in real time during chest compression and also investigated the problems encountered during its use. Ninety-one participants (median age 29 [interquartile range (IQR): 26-32] years; 74% female) completed the simulation. None of the participants failed with SWPF below 250 during three sessions of chest compression. The median (IQR) values of SWPF at three cycles were 17,063 (10,145-26,373), 15,683 (9477-32,394), and 16,960 (7695-27,279). There was no disconnection of equipment or mechanical failures during chest compression. In addition, most participants (83%) replied that they rarely or never experienced difficulty in verbal communication and felt that the loose-fitting PAPR was comfortable. The loose-fitting PAPRs provided sufficient respiratory protection without disturbances during chest compression. Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

    Citation

    Soo Hyun Park, Sung Yeon Hwang, Guntak Lee, Jong Eun Park, Taerim Kim, Tae Gun Shin, Min Seob Sim, Ik Joon Jo, Seonwoo Kim, Hee Yoon. Are loose-fitting powered air-purifying respirators safe during chest compression? A simulation study. The American journal of emergency medicine. 2020 Mar 31


    PMID: 32307296

    View Full Text