Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/87941
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Full Text
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorSchool of Nursing-
dc.creatorSuen, LKP-
dc.creatorGuo, YP-
dc.creatorHo, SSK-
dc.creatorAuYeung, CH-
dc.creatorLam, SC-
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-04T00:53:00Z-
dc.date.available2020-09-04T00:53:00Z-
dc.identifier.issn0195-6701-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/87941-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherW.B. Saundersen_US
dc.rights© 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The Healthcare Infection Society. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).en_US
dc.rightsThe following publication Suen, L. K. P., Guo, Y. P., Ho, S. S. K., Au-Yeung, C. H., & Lam, S. C. (2020). Comparing mask fit and usability of traditional and nanofibre N95 filtering facepiece respirators before and after nursing procedures. Journal of Hospital Infection, 104(3), 336-343, is available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2019.09.014en_US
dc.subjectMask fiten_US
dc.subjectN95 filtering facepiece respiratorsen_US
dc.subjectNanofibre technologyen_US
dc.subjectNursingen_US
dc.subjectPhysical propertiesen_US
dc.subjectUsabilityen_US
dc.titleComparing mask fit and usability of traditional and nanofibre N95 filtering facepiece respirators before and after nursing proceduresen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.spage336-
dc.identifier.epage343-
dc.identifier.volume104-
dc.identifier.issue3-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jhin.2019.09.014-
dcterms.abstractBackground: The reliability of N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) depends on correct fitting. The perceived usability of FFRs is equally important because discomfort during usage may affect compliance. Body movements during nursing procedures may also increase the risk of face seal leakage.-
dcterms.abstractAim: To evaluate the mask fit and usability of the best-fitting 3M N95 FFR and the nanofibre N95 FFR before and after nursing procedures. The physical properties of these FFRs were also examined. Methods: This experimental study had a one-group multiple comparison design. In total, 104 nursing students participated, and performed nursing procedures for 10 min when wearing the best-fitting 3M FFR and the nanofibre FFR. Mask fit and perceived usability of the FFRs were evaluated.-
dcterms.abstractFindings: More participants failed to obtain a fit factor ≥100 when using the best-fitting 3M FFR than when wearing the nanofibre FFR (33.7% vs 21.2%) after the procedures (P=0.417). The nanofibre FFR also demonstrated higher usability than the 3M FFRs in terms of facial heat, breathability, facial pressure, speech intelligibility, itchiness, difficulty of maintaining the mask in place, and comfort level (P<0.001). The nanofibre FFR was also lighter, thinner and had slightly higher bacterial filtration efficiency than the 3M FFRs.-
dcterms.abstractConclusion: The nanofibre FFR demonstrated significantly better usability than the 3M FFRs. None of the respirators were able to provide consistent protection for the wearer, as detected by face seal leakage after performing nursing procedures. Further improvement in the prototype design is needed to increase compliance and ensure the respiratory protection of users.-
dcterms.accessRightsopen accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationJournal of hospital infection, 2020, v. 104, no. 3, p.336-343-
dcterms.isPartOfJournal of hospital infection-
dcterms.issued2020-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85075340216-
dc.identifier.pmid31545991-
dc.description.validate202009 bcma-
dc.description.oaVersion of Recorden_US
dc.identifier.FolderNumberOA_Scopus/WOSen_US
dc.description.pubStatusPublisheden_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Suen_Comparing_mask_fit.pdf355 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Open Access Information
Status open access
File Version Version of Record
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Page views

52
Last Week
0
Last month
Citations as of May 12, 2024

Downloads

19
Citations as of May 12, 2024

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

57
Citations as of May 16, 2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

53
Citations as of May 16, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.