Veille documentaire MTPH

J Hosp Infect. 2008 Feb 21; [Epub ahead of print]
What do healthcare workers think? A survey of facial protection equipment user preferences.
Bryce E, Forrester L, Scharf S, Eshghpour M.
Vancouver Coastal Health, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Data on healthcare workers'(HCWs) self-reported knowledge regarding selection of facial protection equipment, usage preferences and compliance are limited. We used a questionnaire on the use of facial protection equipment at a 700-bed adult tertiary care hospital employing approximately 7000 HCWs. Clinical areas targeted were those with frequent users of N95 respirators: intensive care unit, emergency room, respiratory services, and internal medicine. Respiratory therapists were also invited. In all, 137 questionnaires (68.5%) were returned. Most (72.8%) reported that training on the use of facial protection equipment was ‘sufficient’ to ‘excellent’. The PFR95 and 3M 1860 Cone were used most frequently (56%) followed by the 3M 1870 Pocket (42%). While 95% reported having been fit-tested, only 60% were tested annually. PRF95 use exceeded the number of HCWs fit-tested for the item. Overall comfort and compliance scores were 13.6/20 and 21.5/25, respectively, for respirators and 7.7/10 and 18.5/25 for protective eyewear. No relationship between comfort and years of use of either respirators or protective eyewear was found. The results highlight potential failures in effectiveness in the use of personal protective equipment that could compromise HCW safety, and support observations that compliance in the workplace is usually less than in the research setting.
PubMed