Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Many available facepiece filtering respirators contain ferromagnetic components, which may cause significant problems in the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) environment. We conducted a randomized crossover trial to assess the effectiveness, usability, and comfort of 3 types of respirators, judged to be "conditionally MRI safe" with an aluminum nosepiece (Halyard 46727 duckbill-type respirators and Care Essentials MSK-002 bifold cup-type respirators) or "MRI safe" completely metal free (Eagle AG2200 semirigid cup-type respirators). DESIGN AND SETTING: We recruited 120 participants to undergo a quantitative fit test (QNFT) on each of the 3 respirators in a randomized order. Participants then completed a usability and comfort assessment of each respirator. RESULTS: There were significant differences in the QNFT pass rates (51% for Halyard 46727, 73% for Care Essentials MSK-002, and 86% for Eagle AG2200, P < .001). The first-time fit test pass rate and overall fit factor were significantly higher for Eagle AG2200 compared with the other 2 respirators. Eagle AG2200 scored the lowest ratings in the ease of use and overall comfort. There were no significant differences in other modalities, including the seal rating, breathability, firmness, and overall assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Our study supports the utility of the Eagle AG2200 and Care Essentials MSK-002 respirators for healthcare professionals working in an MRI environment, based on their high QNFT pass rates and reasonably good overall usability and comfort scores. Eagle AG2200 is unique because of its metal-free construction. However, its comparatively lower usability and comfort ratings raise questions about practicality, which may be improved by greater user training.