Cureus . 3D-Printed Personal Protective Face Shields During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey of Canadian Frontline Workers

[tetano]

Cureus


. 2021 Sep 20;13(9):e18141.
doi: 10.7759/cureus.18141. eCollection 2021 Sep.
3D-Printed Personal Protective Face Shields During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey of Canadian Frontline Workers


Anser Daud ^{1 2} , Isra M Hussein ¹ , Peter Chengming Zhang ^{3 4} , Yousuf Ahmed ¹ , Jessica Trac ¹ , Nina Vujovic ¹ , Syed F Rizvi ⁵ , Paul R Kuzyk ^{6 2}



Affiliations

• PMID: 34692348
• PMCID: PMC8526080
• DOI: 10.7759/cureus.18141

Abstract

Background During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, three-dimensional (3D) printing was utilized to rapidly produce face shields for frontline workers in response to an acute shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE). In this study, we examine the perceived utility and performance of 3D-printed (3DP) face shields through a survey of frontline workers in Ontario, Canada. Methodology Frontline workers who received community-produced 3DP face shields from the Canadian initiative "3DPPE GTHA" (March-December 2020) were invited to participate in the study. The survey response rate was 54.3%. Of 63 respondents, 39 were patient-facing and 24 were community-facing frontline workers. Participants were asked to rate performance measures in 10 categories on a five-point Likert scale. Data were categorized by organization and frontline worker type, and a t-test was used to determine statistically significant differences among subgroups. Results The mean preference for 3DP face shields among respondents was 3.2 out of 5 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.1-4.3). Community-facing respondents reported significantly greater overall utility scores for 3DP face shields (3.58, 95% CI: 3.38-3.79) compared to respondents working in a patient-facing profession (2.95, 95% CI: 2.77-3.13; p < 0.05). However, no differences were reported in portability and compatibility with other PPE. Respondents from organizations with large service volumes reported significantly lower overall utility scores (2.67, 95% CI: 2.44-2.89) than respondents in organizations with smaller service volumes (3.45, 95% CI: 3.28-3.62; p < 0.05). Conclusions Community-facing frontline workers and those from smaller service volume organizations endorse higher utility for 3DP face shields than patient-facing frontline workers. Despite this, frontline workers generally rate 3DP face shields positively. 3DP face shields are a viable option for personal and community use and can be used to supplement supply in a community setting.

Keywords: cross-sectional survey; frontline workers; infection prevention and control; personal protective equipment (ppe); ppe shortage; ppe strategies; real-world survey; survey research; three-dimensional (3d) printing; 3d printing.