PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Respiratory Protective Devices”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 181 records · Page 10Linked to original sources

[Microenvironment of positive pressure powered air purifying medical protective equipment].

OBJECTIVE: To study the filtration efficiency of a positive pressure powered air purifying medical protective equipment and the effect of the flow rate on the microenvironment of the equipment. METHODS: The filtration efficiency of high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter was measured with the biologic aerosol of simulating virus (Escherichia coli bacteriophage f(2)). The simulation work was done at the walk rate of 4 km/h in summer. The effect of the flow rate on the oxygen content, the carbon dioxide content, the temperature and the humidity of the microenvironment of the equipment was investigated. The clinical experiments were conducted in three appointed hospital for fighting against SARS. RESULTS: The HEPA filter could filtrate 99.99% simulating viruses in the air. When the flow rate ranged from 75 to 125 L/min, the microenvironment parameters of the equipment were: the oxygen content was between 19.6% and 20.1% (the physiological safety limit is more than 14.6%); the carbon dioxide content ranged from 0.43% to 0.57% (the physiological safety limit is less than 1.0%); the temperature was between 32.0 degrees C to 32.2 degrees C; the humidity ranged from 49.7% to 59.4% (the physiological safety limit is the temperature 31 degrees C and the humidity 85% or temperature 38 degrees C and humidity 50%). Each microenvironment parameter met the demand of a healthy person under the normal workload. In the clinical experiments, the doctors wearing the equipment who performed the tracheotomy for a SARS patient in a deep coma were not infected. CONCLUSION: The medical protective equipment can protect the doctor and nurse in SARS contaminated areas effectively and improve their work conditions.

Air↗

Air filtration: protection against respirable dust.

The principal health hazard associated with airborne dust is attributable to particles with aerodynamic diameters of a few micrometers or less, and filtration is, in principle, a good way of obtaining protection against such small particles. The elements of filtration theory can be deduced from simple arguments, which illustrate that it is difficult to remove particles that are 1 or 2 microns in diameter from air by filtration using a filter made from ordinary textile fibres. Either much finer or electrically charged fibres must be used and, in general, the latter solution is preferable. A number of different electrically charged filter materials exist, examples of which are materials that are charged triboelectrically, by corona, or by induction. The mechanism of action of these materials is described, along with conditions necessary for their successful use.

Air Pollution↗

Evaluation of dust respirators for elimination of mouse aeroallergens.

The efficiency of various dust respirators for eliminating mouse allergens [mouse urine proteins (MUP), pelts proteins (MPP) and serum albumin (MSA)] were evaluated with use of low-volume air samplers and immunochemical methods. Three kinds of dust respirators from one manufacturer which have different efficacy in the exclusion of dust particles were put on the fiber glass filter in each air sampler. Then the air in a mouse housing room was sampled. The allergens passed through the respirators, were trapped in the fiber glass filters, and then extracted from the filters. The allergens of MUP and MPP in the extract were measured by an inhibition method of fluorometric enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for IgE antibody and those of MSA measured by a fluorometric sandwich ELISA. The respirator with the lowest capability of exclusion was found to eliminate 65-86% of respective allergens. The other two respirators with higher powers eliminated 98% of MUP. MPP and MSA were eliminated to undetectable levels through these respirators. This study provided a means for the evaluation of dust respirators for animal aeroallergens.

Air Pollution↗

[Drug prevention and physical protection in occupational asthma].

Many means of protection can be used in work-related asthma. Drug protection may be by symptomatic treatment with classical anti-allergic drugs such as Cromoglycate and Ketotifen. Therapy with corticosteroids has a preventative action on the delayed allergic reaction. Drug protection is however only palliative and incomplete. Individual physical protection needs masks that may be filtering, or anti-dust, or anti-gas, or helmets or masks that have air addition, or even autonomous respirators. The main efforts in prevention should be made against the responsible agents, with their identification and reduction of the level of exposure. This reduction of exposure may be done by re-structuring the work place, by sufficient ventilation and extraction or by addition of moisteners. Modification of the manufacturing process may also be affective, by alterations to make the manipulations in a chamber or closed circuit, to the apparatus, automation and computer control or changes or replacement of the agents responsible for the work-related asthma.

Asthma↗

Industrial respirators: certifying the worker.

The Occupational Safety and Health Act requires medical evaluation of workers prior to certification for industrial respirator wear. For proper evaluation, the physician must understand the physiologic effects of respirators, the stresses of the work and the health of the worker. Most of the information needed to make certification decisions can be obtained from the history, the physical examination and observation of the worker exercising while wearing a respirator. Pulmonary function testing or cardiac stress testing may be helpful in difficult cases.

Female↗