These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Respiratory protection and the risk of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection.
    Author: Nicas M.
    Journal: Am J Ind Med; 1995 Mar; 27(3):317-33. PubMed ID: 7747739.
    Abstract:
    Tuberculosis (TB) can be transmitted to susceptible healthcare workers via inhalation of droplet nuclei carrying viable Mycobacterium tuberculosis bacilli. Several types of respiratory protective devices are compared with respect to efficacy against droplet nuclei penetration: surgical masks, disposable dust/mist particulate respirators (PRs), elastomeric halfmask respirators with high-efficiency (HEPA) filters, and powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) with elastomeric halfmask facepieces and HEPA filters. It is estimated that these devices permit, respectively, 42%, 5.7%, 2%, and 0.39% penetration of droplet nuclei into the facepiece. More limited data for the disposable HEPA filtering-facepiece respirator suggest that it would allow droplet nuclei penetration of 3% or less, similar to the value estimated for the elastomeric halfmask HEPA filter respirator. Because a respirator wearer's cumulative infection risk depends on the extent of droplet nuclei penetration, the cumulative risk will differ, given use of these different respirators. Hypothetical but realistic "low-exposure" and "high-exposure" scenarios are posed that involve, respectively, a 1.6% and a 6.4% annual risk of infection for healthcare workers. For the low-exposure scenario, the 10-year cumulative risks given no respirators versus surgical masks versus disposable dust/mist PRs versus elastomeric halfmask HEPA filter respirators versus HEPA filter PAPRs are, respectively, 15%, 6.7%, 0.94%, 0.33%, and .064%. For the high-exposure scenario, the 10-year cumulative risks for no respirator use versus use of the same four types of respirators are, respectively, 48%, 24%, 3.7%, 1.3%, and 0.26%. The use of disposable HEPA filtering-facepiece respirator should permit cumulative risks close to those estimated for the elastomeric halfmask HEPA filter respirator. It is concluded that when an infectious TB patient undergoes a procedure that generates respiratory aerosols, and when droplet nuclei source control is inadequate, healthcare workers attending the patient may need to wear highly protective respirators, such as HEPA filter PAPRs.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]