Respiratory consequences of N95-type Mask usage in pregnant healthcare workers—a controlled clinical study

Tong, Pearl Shuang Ye; Kale, Anita Sugam; Ng, Kailyn; Loke, Amelia Peiwen; Choolani, Mahesh Arjandas; Lim, Chin Leong; Chan, Yiong Huak; Chong, Yap Seng; Tambyah, Paul Anantharajah; Yong, Eu-Leong

Balancing the potential benefits of respiratory protection against the possible discomfort [15] and potential additive adverse effects on the respiratory functions of pregnant healthcare workers is difficult in the absence of clear data although there is no definite evidence of harm from decades of use of such respirators [16] . A recent study comparing a cohort of pregnant women between 13 to 35 weeks gestation and non-pregnant women showed no differences in respiratory rate, oxygen saturation and transcutaneous carbon dioxide levels in pregnant compared with non-pregnant subjects wearing the N95 FFR during exercise and sedentary activities for over a 1-hour period [17] . However, that study did not specifically examine the impact on busy healthcare workers. Pregnancy has been reported to be the most common cause for denying medical clearance for N95-mask use in a non-medical setting but the specific adverse effects of the respirator itself have not been documented [18] . Our study was performed to address the limited data on N95-mask usage in pregnancy with the aim of investigating the effects of breathing through the N95 mask materials on respiratory functions at rest, during low intensity work, and recovery thereafter in pregnant healthcare workers. The differences in work of breathing and potential adjustments in respiration that are contributed by pregnancy may provide guidance on the use of N95-masks by pregnant health care workers in high-risk environments.