About: User acceptance of reusable respirators in health care

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- owl:sameAs
- Inference Rule:

About: User acceptance of reusable respirators in health care Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : schema:ScholarlyArticle, within Data Space : covidontheweb.inria.fr associated with source document(s)

Attributes	Values
type	Academic Article research paper schema:ScholarlyArticle
isDefinedBy	Covid-on-the-Web dataset
has title	User acceptance of reusable respirators in health care
Creator	Xmd, X Xrn, X Brown, Xclayton Chang, Xjames Frisch, Xmelissa Gucer, Xpatricia Hines, E Hogan, Xregina Mcdiarmid, Xmelissa Roth, Xtracy Xcih, X Xmarc, X Xphd, X Xstella, X
topic	covid:4bde0e7dd1c91ec8d150addef2288cb9ec7d51ad#this
Source	Elsevier; Medline; PMC
abstract	Background Inclusion of reusable respirators, such as elastomeric half-face respirators (EHFRs) and powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs), in hospital respiratory protection inventories may represent 1 solution to the problem of N95 respirator shortages experienced during pandemics. User acceptance of these devices is 1 potential barrier to implementing such a strategy in respiratory protection programs. Methods To assess user attitudes toward various respirators, health care workers enrolled in respiratory protection programs in a medical system using EHFRs, N95s, and PAPRs and completed an online questionnaire that addressed attitudes, beliefs, and respirator preferences under different risk scenarios. Responses were compared between user groups. Results Of 1,152 participants, 53% currently used N95s, 24% used EHFRs, and 23% used PAPRs. N95 users rated their respirators more favorably compared with EHFR and PAPR users (P < .001) regarding comfort and communication, however, EHFR users rated their respirators much more highly regarding sense of protection (P < .001). For all user groups, reusable respirators were significantly more likely (odds ratios 2.3-7.7) to be preferred over N95 filtering facepiece respirators in higher risk scenarios compared to “usual circumstance” scenarios. Conclusions Despite somewhat less favorable ratings on comfort and communication, experienced EHFR and PAPR users still prefer reusable respirators over N95s in certain higher risk scenarios. This suggests that reusable respirators are an acceptable alternative to N95 respirators in health care and offer 1 viable solution to prevent pandemic-generated respirator shortages.
has issue date	2019-06-30(xsd:dateTime)
bibo:doi	10.1016/j.ajic.2018.11.021
bibo:pmid	30638674
has license	els-covid
sha1sum (hex)	4bde0e7dd1c91ec8d150addef2288cb9ec7d51ad
schema:url	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2018.11.021
resource representing a document's title	User acceptance of reusable respirators in health care
has PubMed Central identifier	PMC7115316
has PubMed identifier	30638674
schema:publication	American Journal of Infection Control
resource representing a document's body	covid:4bde0e7dd1c91ec8d150addef2288cb9ec7d51ad#body_text
is http://vocab.deri.ie/void#inDataset of	proxy:http/ns.inria.fr/covid19/4bde0e7dd1c91ec8d150addef2288cb9ec7d51ad
is schema:about of	named entity 'N95' named entity 'N95' named entity 'Background' named entity 'filtering' named entity 'higher' named entity 'scenarios' named entity 'ACCEPTANCE' named entity 'USER' named entity 'POWERED' named entity 'CONCLUSIONS' named entity 'MEDICAL SYSTEM' named entity 'RESPIRATORS' named entity 'RESPIRATORY PROTECTION' named entity 'ASSESS' named entity 'RESULTS' named entity 'PANDEMICS' named entity 'PROGRAMS' named entity 'CURRENTLY' named entity 'USED' named entity 'COMMUNICATION' named entity 'ELASTOMERIC' named entity 'VIABLE' named entity 'VARIOUS' named entity 'BELIEFS' named entity 'STRATEGY' named entity 'USING' named entity 'USER' named entity 'POTENTIAL' named entity 'BARRIER' covid:arg/4bde0e7dd1c91ec8d150addef2288cb9ec7d51ad named entity '28P' named entity 'COMPLETED' named entity 'PREFERRED' named entity 'PROTECTION' named entity 'DEVICES' named entity 'LIKELY' named entity 'GROUPS' named entity 'COMPARED' named entity 'CERTAIN' named entity 'REPRESENT' named entity 'DIFFERENT' named entity 'SHORTAGES' named entity 'FILTERING' named entity 'PANDEMIC' named entity 'THESE' named entity 'RESPONSES' named entity 'INCLUSION' named entity 'HEALTH CARE' named entity 'HEALTH CARE' named entity 'REUSABLE' named entity 'COMFORT' named entity 'PREFERENCES' named entity 'REUSABLE' named entity 'RESPIRATORS' named entity 'RATIOS' named entity 'RATED' named entity 'OFFER' named entity 'PARTICIPANTS' named entity 'ATTITUDES' named entity 'PAPRS' named entity 'PURIFYING' named entity '7.7' named entity 'SOLUTION' named entity 'HIGHLY' named entity 'PROBLEM' named entity 'INVENTORIES'

Faceted Search & Find service v1.13.91 as of Mar 24 2020

Alternative Linked Data Documents: Sponger | ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3229 as of Jul 10 2020, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Single-Server Edition (94 GB total memory)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software