可更换微粒式呼吸器与动力式呼吸器不同佩戴方式对运动任务呼吸防护效果的比较。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Industrial Health Pub Date : 2023-07-29 DOI:10.2486/indhealth.2021-0268
Hiroka Baba, Hajime Ando, Kazunori Ikegami, Shingo Sekoguchi, Taiki Shirasaka, Akira Ogami
{"title":"可更换微粒式呼吸器与动力式呼吸器不同佩戴方式对运动任务呼吸防护效果的比较。","authors":"Hiroka Baba,&nbsp;Hajime Ando,&nbsp;Kazunori Ikegami,&nbsp;Shingo Sekoguchi,&nbsp;Taiki Shirasaka,&nbsp;Akira Ogami","doi":"10.2486/indhealth.2021-0268","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study evaluated the differences in respiratory protection between replaceable particulate respirators (RPRs) and powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) based on different wearing methods during exercise tasks. Ten participants wore RPRs and PAPRs alternately in ways comparable to those adopted by workers in actual workplaces. We measured the fit factor of the respiratory protective equipment (RPE) during exercise tasks for each wearing variation. The exercise load was set to 80W using an ergometer. The exercise tasks comprised five actions described in the Japan Industrial Standard T8150 in 2018. We compared the results with experimental data obtained at rest in our previous studies. The fit factor of RPRs during exercise was significantly lower than (p<0.001) and about half that measured at rest, indicating inadequate respiratory protection. On the other hand, the fit factor of PAPRs during exercise tasks was also significantly lower than (p<0.001) and about half that at rest, but respiratory protection was maintained. This suggests that the protection provided by PAPRs is independent of wearing method during exercise. PAPRs may thus be better than RPRs for workers who have to wear RPE inappropriately due to health problems.</p>","PeriodicalId":13531,"journal":{"name":"Industrial Health","volume":"61 4","pages":"275-282"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/3f/a0/indhealth-61-275.PMC10398166.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of respiratory protection during exercise tasks between different methods of wearing replaceable particulate respirators and powered air-purifying respirators.\",\"authors\":\"Hiroka Baba,&nbsp;Hajime Ando,&nbsp;Kazunori Ikegami,&nbsp;Shingo Sekoguchi,&nbsp;Taiki Shirasaka,&nbsp;Akira Ogami\",\"doi\":\"10.2486/indhealth.2021-0268\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study evaluated the differences in respiratory protection between replaceable particulate respirators (RPRs) and powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) based on different wearing methods during exercise tasks. Ten participants wore RPRs and PAPRs alternately in ways comparable to those adopted by workers in actual workplaces. We measured the fit factor of the respiratory protective equipment (RPE) during exercise tasks for each wearing variation. The exercise load was set to 80W using an ergometer. The exercise tasks comprised five actions described in the Japan Industrial Standard T8150 in 2018. We compared the results with experimental data obtained at rest in our previous studies. The fit factor of RPRs during exercise was significantly lower than (p<0.001) and about half that measured at rest, indicating inadequate respiratory protection. On the other hand, the fit factor of PAPRs during exercise tasks was also significantly lower than (p<0.001) and about half that at rest, but respiratory protection was maintained. This suggests that the protection provided by PAPRs is independent of wearing method during exercise. PAPRs may thus be better than RPRs for workers who have to wear RPE inappropriately due to health problems.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13531,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Industrial Health\",\"volume\":\"61 4\",\"pages\":\"275-282\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/3f/a0/indhealth-61-275.PMC10398166.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Industrial Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.2021-0268\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Industrial Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.2021-0268","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本研究评估了可更换微粒呼吸器(RPRs)和动力空气净化呼吸器(PAPRs)在运动任务中不同佩戴方式对呼吸防护的差异。10名参与者交替佩戴rpr和papr,其方式与实际工作场所的员工所采用的方式相当。我们测量了呼吸防护设备(RPE)在运动任务中的适合系数。使用测力仪将运动负荷设定为80W。演习任务包括2018年日本工业标准T8150中描述的五个行动。我们将结果与以往研究中静止状态下获得的实验数据进行了比较。运动时RPRs的适合因子显著低于(p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of respiratory protection during exercise tasks between different methods of wearing replaceable particulate respirators and powered air-purifying respirators.

This study evaluated the differences in respiratory protection between replaceable particulate respirators (RPRs) and powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) based on different wearing methods during exercise tasks. Ten participants wore RPRs and PAPRs alternately in ways comparable to those adopted by workers in actual workplaces. We measured the fit factor of the respiratory protective equipment (RPE) during exercise tasks for each wearing variation. The exercise load was set to 80W using an ergometer. The exercise tasks comprised five actions described in the Japan Industrial Standard T8150 in 2018. We compared the results with experimental data obtained at rest in our previous studies. The fit factor of RPRs during exercise was significantly lower than (p<0.001) and about half that measured at rest, indicating inadequate respiratory protection. On the other hand, the fit factor of PAPRs during exercise tasks was also significantly lower than (p<0.001) and about half that at rest, but respiratory protection was maintained. This suggests that the protection provided by PAPRs is independent of wearing method during exercise. PAPRs may thus be better than RPRs for workers who have to wear RPE inappropriately due to health problems.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Industrial Health
Industrial Health 医学-毒理学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: INDUSTRIAL HEALTH covers all aspects of occupational medicine, ergonomics, industrial hygiene, engineering, safety and policy sciences. The journal helps promote solutions for the control and improvement of working conditions, and for the application of valuable research findings to the actual working environment.
期刊最新文献
Predicting the use of sugar and caffeine as countermeasures to sleepiness in London bus drivers. Long-term impact of being bullied at school on job satisfaction among middle-aged workers: findings from a 50-year prospective study of the 1958 British Birth Cohort. Workload management measures for supporting nuclear industry main control room operators and emergency response organization personnel during crises-a scoping review. Subsequent development of cholangiocarcinoma caused by exposure to 1,2-dichloropropane and/or dichloromethane in the printing company in Osaka, Japan. A framework for countermeasures design to support professional drivers' fitness-to-drive.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1