• Kathleen McMahon, Donald Jeanmonod, Ronald Check, Leah Rivard, Vamsi Balakrishnan, Brian Kelly, Jonathan Pester, and Rebecca Jeanmonod.
• St. Luke's University Hospital and Health Network, Department of Emergency Medicine, Bethlehem, PA, USA.
• Am J Emerg Med. 2021 Oct 1; 48: 273275273-275.

IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has forced health care workers to explore alternative personal protective equipment (PPE) strategies due to traditional product shortages in the setting of increased global demand. Some physicians have chosen to use elastomeric face masks (EFMs), traditionally used in non-healthcare industries.MethodsWe performed a prospective cohort study of Emergency Medicine (EM) physicians working at a Level 1 Trauma Center who chose to use self-supplied EFMs for PPE. All subjects used commercial EFMs with disposable filters (N95, P95, or P100). All subjects chose their mask size independently with no input from employee health regarding appropriate fit. Per study protocol, subjects were fit tested periodically during clinical shifts over the course of the 6-week study period. All investigators performing fit testing underwent OSHA qualitative fit testing training. Data collected included mask/filters age, subjective assessment of mask seal quality, and fit test results. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.Results105 fit tests were performed on physicians wearing EFMs over the course of 49 shifts. Physicians felt their fit was adequate for all tests performed. There were no fit test failures in any subjects.ConclusionsEFMs have an extremely low failure rate. Physicians are able to assess the adequacy of fit and accurately choose EFM size.Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

22 keywords...

hide…