Impact of low filter resistances on subjective and physiological responses to filtering facepiece respirators.

Ten subjects underwent treadmill exercise at 5.6 km/h over one hour while wearing each of three identical appearing, cup-shaped, prototype filtering facepiece respirators that differed only in their filter resistances (3 mm, 6 mm, and 9 mm H2O pressure drop). There were no statistically significant...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Raymond J Roberge, Jung-Hyun Kim, Jeffrey B Powell, Ronald E Shaffer, Caroline M Ylitalo, John M Sebastian
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2013-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3873997?pdf=render
_version_ 1818562218778689536
author Raymond J Roberge
Jung-Hyun Kim
Jeffrey B Powell
Ronald E Shaffer
Caroline M Ylitalo
John M Sebastian
author_facet Raymond J Roberge
Jung-Hyun Kim
Jeffrey B Powell
Ronald E Shaffer
Caroline M Ylitalo
John M Sebastian
author_sort Raymond J Roberge
collection DOAJ
description Ten subjects underwent treadmill exercise at 5.6 km/h over one hour while wearing each of three identical appearing, cup-shaped, prototype filtering facepiece respirators that differed only in their filter resistances (3 mm, 6 mm, and 9 mm H2O pressure drop). There were no statistically significant differences between filtering facepiece respirators with respect to impact on physiological parameters (i.e., heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, transcutaneous carbon dioxide levels, tympanic membrane temperature), pulmonary function variables (i.e., tidal volume, respiratory rate, volume of carbon dioxide production, oxygen consumption, or ventilation), and subjective ratings (i.e., exertion, thermal comfort, inspiratory effort, expiratory effort and overall breathing comfort). The nominal filter resistances of the prototype filtering facepiece respirators correspond to airflow resistances ranging from 2.1 - 6.6 mm H2O/L/s which are less than, or minimally equivalent to, previously reported values for the normal threshold for detection of inspiratory breathing resistance (6 - 7.6 mm H2O/L/sec). Therefore, filtering facepiece respirators with filter resistances at, or below, this level may not impact the wearer differently physiologically or subjectively from those with filter resistances only slightly above this threshold at low-moderate work rates over one hour.
first_indexed 2024-12-14T01:00:49Z
format Article
id doaj.art-3322c3415a8641e895aca3c02db9b055
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1932-6203
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-14T01:00:49Z
publishDate 2013-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj.art-3322c3415a8641e895aca3c02db9b0552022-12-21T23:23:16ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032013-01-01812e8490110.1371/journal.pone.0084901Impact of low filter resistances on subjective and physiological responses to filtering facepiece respirators.Raymond J RobergeJung-Hyun KimJeffrey B PowellRonald E ShafferCaroline M YlitaloJohn M SebastianTen subjects underwent treadmill exercise at 5.6 km/h over one hour while wearing each of three identical appearing, cup-shaped, prototype filtering facepiece respirators that differed only in their filter resistances (3 mm, 6 mm, and 9 mm H2O pressure drop). There were no statistically significant differences between filtering facepiece respirators with respect to impact on physiological parameters (i.e., heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, transcutaneous carbon dioxide levels, tympanic membrane temperature), pulmonary function variables (i.e., tidal volume, respiratory rate, volume of carbon dioxide production, oxygen consumption, or ventilation), and subjective ratings (i.e., exertion, thermal comfort, inspiratory effort, expiratory effort and overall breathing comfort). The nominal filter resistances of the prototype filtering facepiece respirators correspond to airflow resistances ranging from 2.1 - 6.6 mm H2O/L/s which are less than, or minimally equivalent to, previously reported values for the normal threshold for detection of inspiratory breathing resistance (6 - 7.6 mm H2O/L/sec). Therefore, filtering facepiece respirators with filter resistances at, or below, this level may not impact the wearer differently physiologically or subjectively from those with filter resistances only slightly above this threshold at low-moderate work rates over one hour.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3873997?pdf=render
spellingShingle Raymond J Roberge
Jung-Hyun Kim
Jeffrey B Powell
Ronald E Shaffer
Caroline M Ylitalo
John M Sebastian
Impact of low filter resistances on subjective and physiological responses to filtering facepiece respirators.
PLoS ONE
title Impact of low filter resistances on subjective and physiological responses to filtering facepiece respirators.
title_full Impact of low filter resistances on subjective and physiological responses to filtering facepiece respirators.
title_fullStr Impact of low filter resistances on subjective and physiological responses to filtering facepiece respirators.
title_full_unstemmed Impact of low filter resistances on subjective and physiological responses to filtering facepiece respirators.
title_short Impact of low filter resistances on subjective and physiological responses to filtering facepiece respirators.
title_sort impact of low filter resistances on subjective and physiological responses to filtering facepiece respirators
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3873997?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT raymondjroberge impactoflowfilterresistancesonsubjectiveandphysiologicalresponsestofilteringfacepiecerespirators
AT junghyunkim impactoflowfilterresistancesonsubjectiveandphysiologicalresponsestofilteringfacepiecerespirators
AT jeffreybpowell impactoflowfilterresistancesonsubjectiveandphysiologicalresponsestofilteringfacepiecerespirators
AT ronaldeshaffer impactoflowfilterresistancesonsubjectiveandphysiologicalresponsestofilteringfacepiecerespirators
AT carolinemylitalo impactoflowfilterresistancesonsubjectiveandphysiologicalresponsestofilteringfacepiecerespirators
AT johnmsebastian impactoflowfilterresistancesonsubjectiveandphysiologicalresponsestofilteringfacepiecerespirators