Next Article in Journal
Effect of Vitamin D Deficiency on COVID-19 Status: A Systematic Review
Previous Article in Journal
Persistence of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies Six Months after Infection in an Outbreak with Five Hundred COVID-19 Cases in Borriana (Spain): A Prospective Cohort Study
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Fit Testing Disposable P2/N95 Respirators during COVID-19 in Victoria, Australia: Fit Check Evaluation, Failure Rates, and a Survey of Healthcare Workers

by Jun Keat Chan 1,*, Kah Hong Yep 1, Sarah Magarey 2, Zoe Keon-Cohen 1 and Matt Acheson 1
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Submission received: 30 May 2021 / Revised: 26 June 2021 / Accepted: 28 June 2021 / Published: 6 July 2021

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors propose an interesting manuscript on protective device appropriate use and donning.

I have just a minor remark, the authors could add some sentences in the discussion on previous works performing slightly different tests (more movements with the body during the fitting test).  Since in the present work the participants are static and more aimed to national rules. 

Germonpre P, Van Rompaeye D, Balestra C. 2020. Evaluation of Protection Level, Respiratory Safety, and Practical Aspects of Commercially Available Snorkel Masks as Personal Protection Devices Against Aerosolized Contaminants and SARS-CoV2. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 15/6/2020.

The paper has some merits and is of interest, therefore I think that it should be published. My only concerns are that it is very much oriented on the Local legislations, and therefore it may be useful to add it on the title . For the rest that’s why I proposed the additional reference to discuss other non national « rules » . 

Author Response

Thank you for your review and comments on our manuscript.

We will add a section in the discussion incorporating the Germonpre et al paper which you have kindly provided.

We will also amend the title to clarify that this study is based on local/regional guidelines and practices.

Regards,

Dr Jun Keat Chan

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper from Chan et al. reports an interesting study on the fit testing performed on N95 facial mask. They found thattThe current DHHS fit check is not sufficient to perform an accurate fit testing for respirator 255 seal.

I found the work well-written and the data clearly presented. The objective of the study is particularly relevant to the ongoing pandemic and the results can be useful to improve the fitting of facial masks. Also, the paper is in good agreement with the aim of the new journal Covid. I reccomend to accept the paper in the present form after a careful text editing.

Author Response

Thank you for your review and comments on our manuscript.

We will go through and edit the text for errors.

Regards,

Dr Jun Keat Chan

Reviewer 3 Report

The  paper is a simple, but factual and worth noting description of experience with fit test of facial mask. The paper is well written and structured and although the experiments were limited, they provide a clear point of view on the merit and the limit of the fit test regulations. I think the paper soundness for the journal is very high and that the work is worth of publication as it is. 1

Author Response

Thank you for your review and comments on our manuscript.

Regards,

Dr Jun Keat Chan

Back to TopTop