The implementation of an innovative form of personal protective equipment (PPE) as an infection and prevention control measure for respiratory transmissible diseases is complex, with several elements to be addressed.

To make considerations for integrated face and respiratory protection implementation in clinical settings.

This was a multi-site qualitative study with 87 health workers that compared traditional PPE or powered air-purifying (PAPR) respirators with lightweight PAPR (L-PAPR). Semi-structured interviews were performed based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

Insights into L-PAPR implementation were found. The advantages include enhanced sense of protection, pleasant ventilation, good visibility for both health worker and patient, no fogging of the visor interior, no movement restriction, and easy disinfection process. To enhance usability some barriers should be tackled: reduction of facial pressure; better accommodation for glasses and corrective lenses; reduction of number of steps for assembling the device; infrastructure provision for storage, charging and disinfection of the device; training of health workers for assembling, donning and doffing; and the cost benefit of implementation.

L-PAPR was overall perceived with advantages by many participants, and can be considered a potential option of PPE to be implemented to protect health workers during outbreaks of respiratory transmissible diseases.