• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.176-186
• /
• 1996

The fit of a respirator to the face of an individual can be determined by a qualitative fit test (QLFT) or a quantitative fit test (QNFT). The pass/fail decision from a QLFT or QNFT for the same respirator on the same individual may vary from one wearing to the next, because the human facial features are complex and the respirator may not fit to the face in the same way every time it is worn. This study reports how the fit factors (FF) resulting from a QNFT on an individual vary from day to day and depend on the movements in the six fit test exercises. The reported FFs provide an objective and numerical basis (FF) which does not depend on the subject's voluntary or involuntary response. Four half-mask (H1-H4) and four full-facepiece respirators (F1-F4) were fit tested on one wearer 10 times a day for 5 days with a PortaCount (model 8010, TSI). The FFs obtained for each set of 10 fit tests on a specific day and 50 fit tests on five days involving one of the six exercise regimes have been recorded as log-normal distributions. All of the geometric standard deviations (GSD) of the overall FFs varied widely among every wearing and day except for H1 and F3, and the variability of the half-mask respirators was larger than that of the full-facepiece respirators. Among the six exercise regimes, reading or talking (RT) had markedly the lowest exercise FFs on the tested individual. Generally, there were significant differences between the first normal breathing (NB1) FFs and the remaining exercise FFs.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.38-54
• /
• 1996

Respirator fit testing is required before entering specific work environmentals to ensure that the respirator worn satisfies a minimum of fit and that the user knows when the respirator fits properly. The fit of a respirator can be determined by qualitative (QLFT) or quantitative fit test (QNFT). The QNFT, having been universally accepted more than the QLFT, provide an objective and numerical basis by measuring a fit factor (FF). Until a few years age, only one QNFT technigue was available and accepted by U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations. In the 1980's and 1990's, several new and fundamentally different QNFT methods were developed. Two of the newer methods are commercially availale and are accepted by OSHA as suitable alternatives. In this articles, the principle of operation of each ONFT technique is explained and each technique's major advantages and disadvantages are pointed out. Emphasis is given to negative-pressure air-purifying respirators, as they are in most frequent use today. The requirements and recommendations for fit testing positive-pressure respirators are discussed as well. Finally, the presently available QNFT standards and regulations are summarized to assist the user in making fit testing decisions.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.94-104
• /
• 2021

Objectives: A number of medical institutions have been conducting fit tests to perform seal checks on masks. This study aimed to compare the differences fit factor before and after domestic N95 mask-wearing training through a fit-test. Methods: A survey of 59 healthcare workers was conducted regarding whether they had undergone a fit test or received training on mask-wearing. Further, the fit of two types of domestic N95 masks was measured before and after the training using a QNFT(Quantitative Fit test). The average fit factors before and after training were compared using a paired t-test. Additionally the differences in the fit test pass rate were analyzed using a McNemar test. Results: A statistically significant difference was seen between the fit factors in the fit tests conducted before and after the training (p=0.0015), as well as in the fit of the two types of masks tested (p<0.01). Thus, an improvement in mask fitting was seen after the training, even with differently fitted masks. Conclusions: Upon using a QNFT, a significant increase in the fit factors for N95 masks was observed after training compared with masks that were fitted as usual. This highlights the importance of training in mask-wearing, with the conclusion that training healthcare providers will improve the fit of masks.

• Safety and Health at Work
• /
• v.13 no.4
• /
• pp.500-506
• /
• 2022

This study evaluated the consistency between two quantitative fit test devices with different methods of ambient aerosol counting. Three types of respirators (N95, half mask, and full facepiece) were worn by 50 participants (male, n = 25; female, n = 25), PortaCount (Pro+ 8038) and MT (05U) were connected to one probe to one mask, and fit factors (FFs) were measured simultaneously with the original and modified protocols. As a result of comparing MT FFs with PortaCount FFs as references and by applying for the pass/fail criteria (FF = 100), the consistency between the two devices for half masks and full facepieces was very high. N95 was somewhat weaker than the two type of respirators in the consistency; however, the correlation between the two devices was very strong (p < 0.0001). The results showed that an FF of 100 as measured by PortaCount was likely to be measured as 75 by the MT. Therefore, when performing the fit test for N95 using the MT and pass level of FF 100, a certain level of adjustment is necessary, whether end-user or putting a scaling factor by manufacturer.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Safety
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.52-60
• /
• 2018

This study compares the differences of the fit factor by the order of wearing preference between Particulate filtering facepiece respirators(PFFR) and glasses when participants wore simultaneously and a survey of physical and visual complaint. Recognition level about fit of respirators was investigated and the educational (before- and after-) effect of the fit factor. When participants wore PFFR and glasses, physical complaints were nose pressure, slipping, nose and ear pressure, ear pressure and rim loosen, the most highly physical complaints were nose pressure. Visual complaints were demister, blurry vision, dizziness, visual field, and lens dirty, the most highly visual complaints were demister. But, there was significant difference in physical complaint such as nose pressure(10.3%), slipping (23.0%), nose and ear pressure(14.3%), and rim loosen(16.2%), visual complaint such as visual field(13.8%) and lens dirty(32.4%). For the recognition of fit of respirators, respirators fitness, leak site, an initial point and an object, faulty factor, recognition level was higher. Fit factor was increased after education of proper wearing of respirator. Change of the fit factor was smaller compared to the normal breathing and after 6 actions in case of after education. Questionnaire consisted of general characteristics and physical/visual complaint, recognition of fit. Complaints were measured after the QNFT with multiple choices. Quantitative fit factor was measured by device and compared the result of (before- and after-) educational effect. Also, we selected to 6 actions (Normal breathing, Deep breathing, Bending over, Turning head side to side, Moving head up and down, Normal breathing) among 8 actions OSHA QNFT (Quantitative Fit testing) protocol to measure the fit factors. The fit factor was higher after the training (p=0.000). Descriptive statistics, paired t-test, and Wilcoxon analysis were performed to describe the result of questionnaire and fit test. (P=0.05) Therefore, it is necessary to investigate the quantitative research such as training program and glasses fitting factor about the wearing of PFFR and glasses simultaneously.

• Safety and Health at Work
• /
• v.10 no.3
• /
• pp.370-376
• /
• 2019

Background: Respirator fit testing is a method to assess if the respirator provides an adequate face seal for the worker. Methods: Workers from four Norwegian smelters were invited to participate in the study, and 701 respirator fit tests were performed on 127 workers. Fourteen respirator models were included: one FFABE1P3 and 11 FFP3 respirator models produced in one size and two silicone half masks with P3 filters available in three sizes. The workers performed a quantitative fit test according to Health and Safety Executive 282/28 with 5-6 different respirator models, and they rated the respirators based on comfort. Predictors of overall fit factors were explored. Results: The pass rate for all fit tests was 62%, 56% for women, and 63% for men. The silicone respirators had the highest percentage of passed tests (92-100%). The pass rate for the FFP3 models varied from 19-89%, whereas the FFABE1P3 respirator had a pass rate of 36%. Five workers did not pass with any respirators, and 14 passed with all the respirators tested. Only 63% passed the test with the respirator they normally used. The mean comfort score on the scale from 1 to 5 was 3.2. The respirator model was the strongest predictor of the overall fit factor. The other predictors (age, sex, and comfort score) did not improve the fit of the model. Conclusion: There were large differences in how well the different respirator models fitted the Norwegian smelter workers. The results can be useful when choosing which respirators to include in respirator fit testing programs in similar populations.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.124-133
• /
• 2020

Objectives: Mask fit is a crucial factor in preventing respiratory infections among healthcare workers. The current coronavirus(COVID-19) pandemic calls for the replacement of imported N95 medical masks with domestic N95 versions. In this study, we aimed to determine whether these masks provide proper protection. Methods: Thirty-five participants from three healthcare institutions donned four types of masks and Quantitative Fit Tests(Portacount, USA) were performed. The order of fit test for the four types of masks was randomized, and a three-minute washout period was applied between test times(2 min 29 sec) to reduce potential error stemming from physical exhaustion. Results: There were no significant differences in the Fit Factor for the four types of masks, and there were no gender differences. However, the Fit Factor significantly differed across the three healthcare institutions (p=0.007). With eight of the 35 participants passing, the pass rate with the criteria of 100 or higher was 21%. Conclusions: The mask used in this study was a new domestic N95 medical mask, and the participants were unfamiliar with how to wear it. They reported difficulties with mask fitting. In light of a previous finding that mask fit improved with frequently used masks, wearer preferred masks, or when masks that are regularly worn are used during fit training, the fact that participants were unfamiliar with the mask used in this study is a limitation that should not be overlooked.

• Fashion & Textile Research Journal
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.80-90
• /
• 2016

This study presents quantitative evaluation standards for they mobility test, conducted in the process of a slacks fit test. This study quantified the subjects' evaluation on the wearability of slacks to provide objective qualitative evaluation methods for existing mobility tests. The subjects were women of standard bodytype between the ages of 18 and 24 wearing slacks designed to test their mobility based on differences in ease in waist girth, hip girth, crotch length and knee length. A qualitative evaluation tested the wearability of slacks. Clothing pressure and gap area between the body and slacks were measured based on a quantitative evaluation. The clothing pressure and the gap area between the body and slacks (which reflect the results of the wearability test) were presented in this study as quantitative evaluation standards. Clothing pressure tended to increase as the ease of slacks decreased; however, clothing pressure standards, that induce discomfort, differed by body parts. The hip, crotch, and knee area were relatively less sensitive despite the waist and the abdominal area sensitivity to clothing pressure. This study suggests the minimum ease for the appropriate wearing comfort of slacks by region and motion as standards for the quantitative evaluation of mobility tests. These was reset in accordance to the limits of clothing pressure when the minimum ease was considered as wearable but exceeded the clothing pressure limits.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Safety
• /
• v.35 no.3
• /
• pp.105-115
• /
• 2020

This study compares the difference of fit factors (FF) and visual acuity according to masks and eyeglasses preferences for 54 participants. We the precautions and behaviors of discomfort when wearing masks of eyewear wearers. Contact lens discomfort and priority action of complaints was investigated Glasses fitting factors is Optical Center Height(OH), Vertex Distance(VD) and Pantoscopic Angle(PA). We measured those factors and expressed by the ratio of standard point and change point. Quantitative fit factor was measured by Portacount Pro+ 8038. Also, we selected to 6 exercises among 8 exercises OSHA QNFT (Quantitative Fit testing) protocol to measure the fit factors. The pass/ fail criterion of FF was set at 100. Visual acuity(VA) test chart is developed by Chunsuk Han was used, Descriptive statistics was performed. Descriptive statistics(SAS ver 9.2), it is used geometric means, Wilcoxon analysis(P=0.05) When wearing the mask preferentially, fit factor(FF) was high according to the step of glasses fitting parameter. on the other hand, when the glasses first choice, the visual acuity(VA) was high. there was no significant difference. In the case of fit factor (FF), mask first choice/ glasses first choice is OH (p=0.671/ p=0.332), VD (p=0.602/ p=0.571) and PA (p=0.549/ p=0.607). Visual acuity (VA), mask first choice/ glasses first choice is OH (p=0.753/ p=0.386), VD (p=0.815/ p=0.557) and PA (p=0.856/ p=0.562). The workers of workplace and office chose glasses but occupational health workers and students chose mask. In case of discomforts, it was suggested to remove the mask and tolerate discomforts. The main discomforts and usual action of lens were dryness, hyperemia, foreign body sensation, ophthalmodynia, decreased vision and glasses wearing. Therefore, it is necessary to develop a mask wearing method education program considering glasses fitting and develop a hybrid model that minimizes inconvenience when wearing glasses and a mask at the same time.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Safety
• /
• v.33 no.1
• /
• pp.47-53
• /
• 2018

This study compares the interrelation of fit factor(FF) and visual acuity test by the order of wearing preference between Particulate filtering face piece respirators(PFFR) and glasses for 54 participants. Glasses fitting factors is Optical Center Height(OH), Vertex Distance(VD) and Pantoscopic Angle(PA) or Visual acuity. We measured those factors and expressed by the ratio of standard point and change point. Quantitative fit factor was measured by Portacount Pro+ 8038 and compared the result of preference of wearing order between respirators and glasses. Also, we selected to 6 exercises among 8 exercises OSHA QNFT (Quantitative Fit testing) protocol to measure the fit factors. The pass/ fail criterion of FF was set at 100. Visual acuity test chart is developed by Chunsuk Han was used, Descriptive statistics was performed. Descriptive statistics(SAS ver 9.2), it is used geometric means, Wilcoxon analysis, peason correlation(P=0.05) Fit factor was increased when the respirator was worn before wearing the glasses(p=0.000) and decreased for visual acuity(p=0.000) The negative correlation was showed between OH and Overall fit factor(r=-0.409, p=0.002). Among 54 participants, 11 participants(20.3%) were worn respirator before wearing glasses and 1 participant(1.9%) was worn glasses before wearing respirator. The overall fit test showed the higher level was investigated for the group of participants wearing respirator before wearing glasses in 6 exercises. Also, overall fit factor were increased when participants wore glasses prior to respirator(16.6) to respirator prior to glasses(36.6). Visual acuity were increased when participants wore respirator prior to glasses(93.8) to glasses prior to respirator(106.0). Finally, comparison result of overall fit factor and visual acuity were glasses first choice from mask first choice. The results showed that higher overall fit factor was investigate when the participants wore the respirator prior to glassess at all. The results implied that it is important to maintain the overall fit factor and visual acuity according to the consideration of OH for glasses fitting when worker wore respirator and glasses at the same time.