Cargando…
The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT): a cluster-randomized comparison of respirator and medical mask effectiveness against respiratory infections in healthcare personnel
BACKGROUND: Although N95 filtering facepiece respirators and medical masks are commonly used for protection against respiratory infections in healthcare settings, more clinical evidence is needed to understand the optimal settings and exposure circumstances for healthcare personnel to use these devi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4890247/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27255755 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-016-1494-2 |
_version_ | 1782435086454489088 |
---|---|
author | Radonovich, Lewis J. Bessesen, Mary T. Cummings, Derek A. Eagan, Aaron Gaydos, Charlotte Gibert, Cynthia Gorse, Geoffrey J. Nyquist, Ann-Christine Reich, Nicholas G. Rodrigues-Barradas, Maria Savor-Price, Connie Shaffer, Ronald E. Simberkoff, Michael S. Perl, Trish M. |
author_facet | Radonovich, Lewis J. Bessesen, Mary T. Cummings, Derek A. Eagan, Aaron Gaydos, Charlotte Gibert, Cynthia Gorse, Geoffrey J. Nyquist, Ann-Christine Reich, Nicholas G. Rodrigues-Barradas, Maria Savor-Price, Connie Shaffer, Ronald E. Simberkoff, Michael S. Perl, Trish M. |
author_sort | Radonovich, Lewis J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Although N95 filtering facepiece respirators and medical masks are commonly used for protection against respiratory infections in healthcare settings, more clinical evidence is needed to understand the optimal settings and exposure circumstances for healthcare personnel to use these devices. A lack of clinically germane research has led to equivocal, and occasionally conflicting, healthcare respiratory protection recommendations from public health organizations, professional societies, and experts. METHODS: The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT) is a prospective comparison of respiratory protective equipment to be conducted at multiple U.S. study sites. Healthcare personnel who work in outpatient settings will be cluster-randomized to wear N95 respirators or medical masks for protection against infections during respiratory virus season. Outcome measures will include laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections, acute respiratory illness, and influenza-like illness. Participant exposures to patients, coworkers, and others with symptoms and signs of respiratory infection, both within and beyond the workplace, will be recorded in daily diaries. Adherence to study protocols will be monitored by the study team. DISCUSSION: ResPECT is designed to better understand the extent to which N95s and MMs reduce clinical illness among healthcare personnel. A fully successful study would produce clinically relevant results that help clinician-leaders make reasoned decisions about protection of healthcare personnel against occupationally acquired respiratory infections and prevention of spread within healthcare systems. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT01249625 (11/29/2010). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4890247 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-48902472016-06-09 The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT): a cluster-randomized comparison of respirator and medical mask effectiveness against respiratory infections in healthcare personnel Radonovich, Lewis J. Bessesen, Mary T. Cummings, Derek A. Eagan, Aaron Gaydos, Charlotte Gibert, Cynthia Gorse, Geoffrey J. Nyquist, Ann-Christine Reich, Nicholas G. Rodrigues-Barradas, Maria Savor-Price, Connie Shaffer, Ronald E. Simberkoff, Michael S. Perl, Trish M. BMC Infect Dis Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Although N95 filtering facepiece respirators and medical masks are commonly used for protection against respiratory infections in healthcare settings, more clinical evidence is needed to understand the optimal settings and exposure circumstances for healthcare personnel to use these devices. A lack of clinically germane research has led to equivocal, and occasionally conflicting, healthcare respiratory protection recommendations from public health organizations, professional societies, and experts. METHODS: The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT) is a prospective comparison of respiratory protective equipment to be conducted at multiple U.S. study sites. Healthcare personnel who work in outpatient settings will be cluster-randomized to wear N95 respirators or medical masks for protection against infections during respiratory virus season. Outcome measures will include laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections, acute respiratory illness, and influenza-like illness. Participant exposures to patients, coworkers, and others with symptoms and signs of respiratory infection, both within and beyond the workplace, will be recorded in daily diaries. Adherence to study protocols will be monitored by the study team. DISCUSSION: ResPECT is designed to better understand the extent to which N95s and MMs reduce clinical illness among healthcare personnel. A fully successful study would produce clinically relevant results that help clinician-leaders make reasoned decisions about protection of healthcare personnel against occupationally acquired respiratory infections and prevention of spread within healthcare systems. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT01249625 (11/29/2010). BioMed Central 2016-06-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4890247/ /pubmed/27255755 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-016-1494-2 Text en © Radonovich et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Study Protocol Radonovich, Lewis J. Bessesen, Mary T. Cummings, Derek A. Eagan, Aaron Gaydos, Charlotte Gibert, Cynthia Gorse, Geoffrey J. Nyquist, Ann-Christine Reich, Nicholas G. Rodrigues-Barradas, Maria Savor-Price, Connie Shaffer, Ronald E. Simberkoff, Michael S. Perl, Trish M. The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT): a cluster-randomized comparison of respirator and medical mask effectiveness against respiratory infections in healthcare personnel |
title | The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT): a cluster-randomized comparison of respirator and medical mask effectiveness against respiratory infections in healthcare personnel |
title_full | The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT): a cluster-randomized comparison of respirator and medical mask effectiveness against respiratory infections in healthcare personnel |
title_fullStr | The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT): a cluster-randomized comparison of respirator and medical mask effectiveness against respiratory infections in healthcare personnel |
title_full_unstemmed | The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT): a cluster-randomized comparison of respirator and medical mask effectiveness against respiratory infections in healthcare personnel |
title_short | The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT): a cluster-randomized comparison of respirator and medical mask effectiveness against respiratory infections in healthcare personnel |
title_sort | respiratory protection effectiveness clinical trial (respect): a cluster-randomized comparison of respirator and medical mask effectiveness against respiratory infections in healthcare personnel |
topic | Study Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4890247/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27255755 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-016-1494-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT radonovichlewisj therespiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT bessesenmaryt therespiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT cummingsdereka therespiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT eaganaaron therespiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT gaydoscharlotte therespiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT gibertcynthia therespiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT gorsegeoffreyj therespiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT nyquistannchristine therespiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT reichnicholasg therespiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT rodriguesbarradasmaria therespiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT savorpriceconnie therespiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT shafferronalde therespiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT simberkoffmichaels therespiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT perltrishm therespiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT radonovichlewisj respiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT bessesenmaryt respiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT cummingsdereka respiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT eaganaaron respiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT gaydoscharlotte respiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT gibertcynthia respiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT gorsegeoffreyj respiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT nyquistannchristine respiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT reichnicholasg respiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT rodriguesbarradasmaria respiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT savorpriceconnie respiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT shafferronalde respiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT simberkoffmichaels respiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel AT perltrishm respiratoryprotectioneffectivenessclinicaltrialrespectaclusterrandomizedcomparisonofrespiratorandmedicalmaskeffectivenessagainstrespiratoryinfectionsinhealthcarepersonnel |