Raymond J Roberge1, Jung-Hyun Kim2, Jeffrey B Powell2. 1. US National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Pittsburgh, PA. Electronic address: dtn0@cdc.gov. 2. US National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Pittsburgh, PA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To determine the physiological and subjective effects of wearing an N95 filtering facepiece respirator (N95 FFR) in advanced stages of pregnancy. METHODS: Healthy pregnant women (n = 22) and nonpregnant women (n = 22) had physiological and subjective measurements taken with and without wearing an N95 FFR during exercise and postural sedentary activities over a 1-hour period. RESULTS: There were no differences between the pregnant and nonpregnant women with respect to heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, transcutaneous carbon dioxide level, chest wall temperature, aural temperature, and subjective perceptions of exertion and thermal comfort. No significant effect on fetal heart rate was noted. CONCLUSIONS: Healthy pregnant women wearing an N95 FFR for 1 hour during exercise and sedentary activities did not exhibit any significant differences in measured physiological and subjective responses compared with nonpregnant women. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND: To determine the physiological and subjective effects of wearing an N95 filtering facepiece respirator (N95 FFR) in advanced stages of pregnancy. METHODS: Healthy pregnant women (n = 22) and nonpregnant women (n = 22) had physiological and subjective measurements taken with and without wearing an N95 FFR during exercise and postural sedentary activities over a 1-hour period. RESULTS: There were no differences between the pregnant and nonpregnant women with respect to heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, transcutaneous carbon dioxide level, chest wall temperature, aural temperature, and subjective perceptions of exertion and thermal comfort. No significant effect on fetal heart rate was noted. CONCLUSIONS: Healthy pregnant women wearing an N95 FFR for 1 hour during exercise and sedentary activities did not exhibit any significant differences in measured physiological and subjective responses compared with nonpregnant women. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Raymond J Roberge; Jung-Hyun Kim; Jeffrey B Powell; Ronald E Shaffer; Caroline M Ylitalo; John M Sebastian Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-12-27 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Kai Kisielinski; Paul Giboni; Andreas Prescher; Bernd Klosterhalfen; David Graessel; Stefan Funken; Oliver Kempski; Oliver Hirsch Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-04-20 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Christiane Matuschek; Friedrich Moll; Heiner Fangerau; Johannes C Fischer; Kurt Zänker; Martijn van Griensven; Marion Schneider; Detlef Kindgen-Milles; Wolfram Trudo Knoefel; Artur Lichtenberg; Balint Tamaskovics; Freddy Joel Djiepmo-Njanang; Wilfried Budach; Stefanie Corradini; Dieter Häussinger; Torsten Feldt; Björn Jensen; Rainer Pelka; Klaus Orth; Matthias Peiper; Olaf Grebe; Kitti Maas; Peter Arne Gerber; Alessia Pedoto; Edwin Bölke; Jan Haussmann Journal: Eur J Med Res Date: 2020-08-12 Impact factor: 2.175