• 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.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.9 no.2
• /
• pp.79-89
• /
• 1999

A quantitative fit test, condensation nuclei counting (Portacount 8025, TSI), was performed concurrently with a banana oil (isoamyl acetate: IAA) qualitative fit test (MSA) to evaluate reliability on IAA QLFT and correlation between two methods. One brands of quarter mask (3M model 7500 medium) was prepared for QLFT with HEPA filter and gas & vapor removing media, i.e., combination cartridge. 110 subjects (65 male, 45 female) were fit tested QNFT and QLFT each three times. For a wearer combination having a FF<10, as determined by CNC QNFT, the point es timate (${\beta}$-error) of the probability of that combination not being rejected by the banana oil QLFT was found to be 0.0 with 95% confidence that this statistic is not expected to exceed 0.15. For a wearer combination having a FF<100, as determined by CNC QNFT, the point estimate of the probability of that combination not being rejected by the banana oil QLFT was found to be 0.07 with 95% confidence that this statistic is not expected to exceed 0.13. The uncertainty associated with each estimate, however, is large due to the small number of study subjects with inadequately fitting respirators.

• 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.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.99-112
• /
• 1997

A quantitative fit test, condensation nuclei counting(Portacount 8025, TSI), was performed concurrently with a qualitative fit test, sodium saccharin(FT-10, 3M) to evaluate FF values and to determine the correlation between two methods. Two brands of full facepieces, T, S and two brands of half masks, T, S, were fit tested, respectively, on 103 wearers one time. The FF values obtained by CNC QNFT were lognormally distributed. The FF values for T brand of respirators were statistically very much higher than those for S brand of respirators. For a full facepiece wearer combination having a $FF{\leq}100$, as determined by CNC QNFT, the point estimate of the probability of that combination not being rejected by the saccharin QLFT was found to be 0.09 with 90% confidence that this statistic is not expected to exceed 0.25. For a half mask wearer combination having a $FF{\leq}10$, as determined by CNC QNFT, the point estimate of the probability of that combination not being rejected by the saccharin QLFT was found to be 0.10 with 90%, confidence that this statistic is not expected to exceed 0.23. The uncertainty associated with each estimate, however, is large due to the small number of study subjects with inadequately fitting respirators. This result indicates that saccharin QLFT may be more suitable for adequately fitting respirators than inadequately fitting respirators.

• 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.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.177-183
• /
• 2013

Objectives: 본 연구는 호흡보호구의 밀착도의 척도인 밀착계수 (FF)를 이용하여마스크에 마스크 커버를 씌웠을 때 호흡보호구의 밀착에 어떠한 영향을 미치는지 평가하고자 하였다. Methods: 3개 회사의 호흡보호구 (1개 1/4형, 2개 반면형)를 선정하여25의 피검자 (남자 16, 여자 9)에게 마스크 커버를 씌우지 않은 마스크와 씌운 마스크를 착용하게 하고 정량적인 밀착도 검사 (QNFT)를 실시하여 밀착계수 (FF)를 측정하였다. 동일한 조건에서 각 피검자에게 3번의 QNFT를 실시였으므로 한 마스크 당 씌운 것 75회, 씌우지 않은 것 75회, 150회를 시행하여 비교하였고 3개 마스크에 총 450회를 시행하였다. Results: 마스크 A (반면형)는 예상과는 다르게 마스크 커버가 있는 경우가 없는 경우보다 FF값이 더 높게 나왔으며 (p<0.05), 마스크 B (1/4형)와 마스크 C (반면형)은 마스크 커버가 없는 경우가 있는 경우보다 FF가 높게 나왔다. 마스크 B는 마스크 커버와 관계없이 FF가 너무 낮아 밀착에 문제가 있다고 판단되었으며 반대로 마스크 C는 마스크 커버에 영향을 받았으나 FF가 매우 높게 나와 밀착에는 큰 문제가 없다고 판단되었다. Conclusions: 본 연구 결과는 마스크에 자신의 마스크 커버를 씌울 경우 밀착에 큰 영향은 없는 것으로 나타났으나 FF만 가지고 실험했기 때문에 제한적이며 실제 작업현장에서 밀착도에 영향을 주지 않는지를 결정하기 위해서는 작업장보호계수 (WPF)를 이용한 보다 많은 연구가 필요하다.

• 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.

• 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.