Emerging infectious disease events have caused illnesses and deaths among workers in critical sectors that provide essential services. Existing scholarship surrounding occupational infection prevention highlights several potential reasons why workers get sick when outbreaks occur, including poor hand hygiene, inadequate worker training, and, perhaps most importantly, deficient personal protective equipment. Yet the literature offers little empirical evidence describing which facets of personal protective equipment programs are problematic and shows considerable disagreement about what types of gear are necessary to protect workers when outbreaks occur. This dissertation joins two studies, one of worksite inspection data and the other of personal protective equipment protocols, to address these gaps. Examining violations of relevant federal and state occupational safety and health regulations shows that employers do not always provide the right types of personal protective equipment for controlling hazards their workers face and that the ways in which inspections are planned and carried out influence the likelihood of discovering such problems. The accompanying systematic review of personal protective equipment used during four recent outbreaks shapes a matrix of recommended protective clothing and gear that aims to unify disparate literature on the topic. Coupled with a discussion of policy implications germane to worker and public health and biodefense and a proposed paradigm-shift in occupational infection prevention, the personal protective equipment recommendations represent guidelines that are intended for use in the early phase of outbreak response regardless of a particular pathogen's mode of transmission or before such details are fully understood.