Perceived Workload Using Separate (FFP2 Respirator and Face Shield) and Integrated (Powered Air Purifying Respirator) Personal Protective Equipment for Respiratory Protection: Human Factors Randomized Cross-over Feasibility Protocol (Preprint)

Abstract

Introduction The design of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) may affect well-being and clinical work. PPE as an integrated item may improve usability and increase adherence by health workers (HW) and reduce occupational-acquired diseases. As integrated PPE, a lightweight battery-powered air-purifying respirator (L-PAPR) could be used during health procedures where HWs are exposed to airborne pathogens. The human factors affecting implementation of alternative PPE such as L-PAPR have not been thoroughly studied. Research Question Under which conditions and testing by human factors are NIOSH Standards compliant PAPRs and Light PAPRs superior to a NIOSH certified N95 Respirator and Face shield in clinical care. The population is healthcare professionals, the intervention is task type, the comparators are N95 and Face Shield, Traditional PAPR and Light PAPR. The outcomes are user-error, communications, safety and end-user preferences Type of study and main methods This is an interventional randomized crossover quality improvement feasibility study consisting of a 3 site simulation study (Phase 1; 10 participants each site) and 2 site field testing (Phase 2; 30 participants each site). The following aspects are evaluated comparing L-PAPR (integrated PPE), the traditional PAPR and N95 and Face shield: perceived workload, usability, usage errors, and heart rate. Interviews to identify barriers and enablers to implementation, and effective training will be conducted.