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.
Comparison of respiratory protection during exercise tasks between different methods of wearing replaceable particulate respirators and powered air-purifying respirators