Register      Login
Healthcare Infection Healthcare Infection Society
Official Journal of the Australasian College for Infection Prevention and Control
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Can homemade fit testing solutions be as effective as commercial products?

Brett G. Mitchell A B C F , Anne Wells A , Alistair McGregor A D and Duncan McKenzie E
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Tasmanian Infection Prevention and Control Unit, PO Box 125, Hobart, Tas. 7001, Australia.

B Australian Catholic University, School of Nursing Midwifery and Paramedicine, PO Box 256, Dickson, ACT 2602, Australia.

C University of Tasmania, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Private Bag 135, Hobart, Tas. 7000, Australia.

D Department of Infectious Diseases, Royal Hobart Hospital, PO Box 1061, Hobart, Tas. 7001, Australia.

E Department of Pharmacy, Royal Hobart Hospital, PO Box 1061, Hobart, Tas. 7001, Australia.

F Corresponding author. Email: bgmitc001@myacu.edu.au

Healthcare Infection 17(4) 111-114 https://doi.org/10.1071/HI12019
Submitted: 4 June 2012  Accepted: 14 August 2012   Published: 23 October 2012

Abstract

Background: Fit testing is used to determine whether a N95 mask will provide respiratory protection for the wearer by preventing inhalation of airborne transmitted microorganisms. National guidelines recommend that healthcare workers (HCW) who use N95 masks require fit testing. Quantitative fit testing requires the purchasing and use of fit testing solutions and associated equipment. In high volume, these solutions are expensive and may not be readily available, as was seen in the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic. The aim of this study was to determine how a homemade solution compared against a commercially available product and a placebo.

Methods: A fit test was performed on the same person, on three separate occasions, using three different solutions – commercial (45% sodium saccharin), homemade (to be disclosed) and placebo (water). The solution was double blinded and solutions were chosen and administered in a random order.

Results: A total of 48 people participated in this study. At the threshold testing stage, 8.3% did not taste any solution, 16.7% of people could taste the placebo, 89.6% could taste the commercial solution and 91.7% could taste the homemade solution. All persons who could taste the commercial solution could taste homemade solution.

Conclusion: The findings of our study suggest that fit testing solutions could be made locally with a similar effect to that of commercial products, that quantitative fit testing is unreliable and that serious consideration should be given to the role of quantitative fit testing in future guidelines and standards. We recommend that this study be conducted on a larger scale to support our findings.


References

[1]  Seto WH, Tsang D, Yung RW, Ching TY, Ng TK, Ho M, et al Effectiveness of precautions against droplets and contact in prevention of nosocomial transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Lancet 2003; 361 1519–20.
Effectiveness of precautions against droplets and contact in prevention of nosocomial transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3s3islGitQ%3D%3D&md5=531aa92b7ec76c2309f69dfd8a939d2dCAS |

[2]  Webster R, Peiris M, Chen H, Guan Y. H5N1 Outbreaks and Enzootic Influenza. Emerg Infect Dis 2006; 12 3–8.
H5N1 Outbreaks and Enzootic Influenza.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

[3]  Bearden A, Friedrich TC, Goldberg TL, Byrne B, Spiegel C, Schult P, et al An outbreak of the 2009 influenza a (H1N1) virus in a children’s hospital. Influenza Other Respir Viruses 2012; 6 374–9.
An outbreak of the 2009 influenza a (H1N1) virus in a children’s hospital.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

[4]  National Health and Medical Research Council. Australian Guidelines for the Prevention and Control of Infection in Healthcare. Canberra: National Health and Medical Research Council; 2010. Available from: http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/node/30290 [verified September 2012]

[5]  Lam SC, Lee JKL, Yau SY, Charm CYC. Sensitivity and specificity of the user-seal-check in determining the fit of N95 respirators. J Hosp Infect 2011; 77 252–6.
Sensitivity and specificity of the user-seal-check in determining the fit of N95 respirators.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC3M3itVWqsg%3D%3D&md5=f12f5a5d9ece7024602aad64b75f61f8CAS |

[6]  Department of Health & Human Services Tasmania. Infection Control Advice Fit Testing of P2 (N95) masks. Hobart, Tas.: Department of Health & Human Services Tasmania; 2009.

[7]  Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Personal Protective Equipment. Fit testing. Washington, DC: Occupational Safety and Health Administration; 2010.

[8]  Kimberly-Clark Professional. Qualitative Fit Testing Instructions. For KIMBERLY-CLARK* TECNOL* PFR95* N95 Particulate Filter Respirators and Surgical Masks. Kimberly-Clark Professional; 2006. Available from: http://www.kcprofessional.com/us/download/product%20literature/KCPI_0356_fit_test%202.pdf [verified June 2012]

[9]  Hannum D, Cycan K, Jones L, Stewart M, Morris S, Markowitz SM, et al The effect of respirator training on the ability of healthcare workers to pass a qualitative fit test. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1996; 17 636–40.
The effect of respirator training on the ability of healthcare workers to pass a qualitative fit test.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK2s%2FlsFWnuw%3D%3D&md5=51129354fe0cc58a75b17dd62784b1b7CAS |

[10]  Lee MCMD, Takaya SM, Long RM, Joffe AMMD. Respirator‐fit testing: does it ensure the protection of healthcare workers against respirable particles carrying pathogens? Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008; 29 1149–56.
Respirator‐fit testing: does it ensure the protection of healthcare workers against respirable particles carrying pathogens?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD1cjltFSguw%3D%3D&md5=2c63b9152c5bc2cce9c2474335f3a6f4CAS |

[11]  Au SSW, Gomersall CD, Leung P, Li PTY. A randomised controlled pilot study to compare filtration factor of a novel non-fit-tested high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtering facemask with a fit-tested N95 mask. J Hosp Infect 2010; 76 23–5.
A randomised controlled pilot study to compare filtration factor of a novel non-fit-tested high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtering facemask with a fit-tested N95 mask.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC3cjmtlGjsw%3D%3D&md5=a7d3729ef263098216934e9519711819CAS |

[12]  Kelly L, Clark K. The effectiveness of training and taste testing when using respirator masks. J Hosp Infect 2004; 58 240–1.
The effectiveness of training and taste testing when using respirator masks.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2crjtFWlsA%3D%3D&md5=56fe4b43093f83a3017e139e52048272CAS |