PAPRs end frustration of fit-test failures
Hospital diverts funds to reusables
At DuBois (PA) Regional Medical Center, employees were failing N95 fit tests in alarming numbers. In the cardiology department, about 46% of employees failed fit-tests even after trying a variety of models and sizes. Things weren't much better in anesthesia (35%), cardiovascular ICU (34%), or the emergency department (26%).
The most important number the one that prompted the hospital to switch to powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) was the cost: about $37,000, mostly in loss of productivity of clinicians who had to spend an average of 35 minutes to complete a fit-test.
By comparison, the investment in PAPRs and education cost about $38,000, including about $5,000 for education the only annual cost.
"We were investing a significant time commitment and money every year, and the [fit-test] failure rates were higher than we were comfortable with," says Sue Miller, RN, COHN-S/CM, director of employee health at DuBois.
Fortuitously, DuBois made the transition to PAPRs in 2008, a year before hospitals were faced with the novel H1N1 strain of influenza. That reinforced the benefits of reusable respirators, as the hospital avoided the scramble for supplies and massive fit-testing efforts.
"For us, it was a good return on investment. It made our life so much easier during the crisis," says Miller. "I'm definitely very happy we went with this solution."
At DuBois (PA) Regional Medical Center, employees were failing N95 fit tests in alarming numbers. In the cardiology department, about 46% of employees failed fit-tests even after trying a variety of models and sizes. Things weren't much better in anesthesia (35%), cardiovascular ICU (34%), or the emergency department (26%).You have reached your article limit for the month. Subscribe now to access this article plus other member-only content.
- Award-winning Medical Content
- Latest Advances & Development in Medicine
- Unbiased Content