Cargando…

Quantitative Method for Comparative Assessment of Particle Removal Efficiency of Fabric Masks as Alternatives to Standard Surgical Masks for PPE

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, cloth masks are being used to control the spread of virus, but the efficacy of these loose-fitting masks is not well known. Here, tools and methods typically used to assess tight-fitting respirators were modified to quantify the efficacy of community-produced an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mueller, Amy V., Eden, Matthew J., Oakes, Jessica M., Bellini, Chiara, Fernandez, Loretta A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7346791/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32838296
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matt.2020.07.006
_version_ 1783556464764256256
author Mueller, Amy V.
Eden, Matthew J.
Oakes, Jessica M.
Bellini, Chiara
Fernandez, Loretta A.
author_facet Mueller, Amy V.
Eden, Matthew J.
Oakes, Jessica M.
Bellini, Chiara
Fernandez, Loretta A.
author_sort Mueller, Amy V.
collection PubMed
description In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, cloth masks are being used to control the spread of virus, but the efficacy of these loose-fitting masks is not well known. Here, tools and methods typically used to assess tight-fitting respirators were modified to quantify the efficacy of community-produced and commercially produced fabric masks as personal protective equipment. Two particle counters concurrently sample ambient air and air inside the masks; mask performance is evaluated by mean particle removal efficiency and statistical variability when worn as designed and with a nylon overlayer, to independently assess fit and material. Worn as designed, both commercial surgical masks and cloth masks had widely varying effectiveness (53%–75% and 28%–91% particle removal efficiency, respectively). Most surgical-style masks improved with the nylon overlayer, indicating poor fit. This rapid testing method uses widely available hardware, requires only a few calculations from collected data, and provides both a holistic and aspect-wise evaluation of mask performance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7346791
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73467912020-07-10 Quantitative Method for Comparative Assessment of Particle Removal Efficiency of Fabric Masks as Alternatives to Standard Surgical Masks for PPE Mueller, Amy V. Eden, Matthew J. Oakes, Jessica M. Bellini, Chiara Fernandez, Loretta A. Matter Article In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, cloth masks are being used to control the spread of virus, but the efficacy of these loose-fitting masks is not well known. Here, tools and methods typically used to assess tight-fitting respirators were modified to quantify the efficacy of community-produced and commercially produced fabric masks as personal protective equipment. Two particle counters concurrently sample ambient air and air inside the masks; mask performance is evaluated by mean particle removal efficiency and statistical variability when worn as designed and with a nylon overlayer, to independently assess fit and material. Worn as designed, both commercial surgical masks and cloth masks had widely varying effectiveness (53%–75% and 28%–91% particle removal efficiency, respectively). Most surgical-style masks improved with the nylon overlayer, indicating poor fit. This rapid testing method uses widely available hardware, requires only a few calculations from collected data, and provides both a holistic and aspect-wise evaluation of mask performance. Elsevier Inc. 2020-09-02 2020-07-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7346791/ /pubmed/32838296 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matt.2020.07.006 Text en © 2020 Elsevier Inc. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
spellingShingle Article
Mueller, Amy V.
Eden, Matthew J.
Oakes, Jessica M.
Bellini, Chiara
Fernandez, Loretta A.
Quantitative Method for Comparative Assessment of Particle Removal Efficiency of Fabric Masks as Alternatives to Standard Surgical Masks for PPE
title Quantitative Method for Comparative Assessment of Particle Removal Efficiency of Fabric Masks as Alternatives to Standard Surgical Masks for PPE
title_full Quantitative Method for Comparative Assessment of Particle Removal Efficiency of Fabric Masks as Alternatives to Standard Surgical Masks for PPE
title_fullStr Quantitative Method for Comparative Assessment of Particle Removal Efficiency of Fabric Masks as Alternatives to Standard Surgical Masks for PPE
title_full_unstemmed Quantitative Method for Comparative Assessment of Particle Removal Efficiency of Fabric Masks as Alternatives to Standard Surgical Masks for PPE
title_short Quantitative Method for Comparative Assessment of Particle Removal Efficiency of Fabric Masks as Alternatives to Standard Surgical Masks for PPE
title_sort quantitative method for comparative assessment of particle removal efficiency of fabric masks as alternatives to standard surgical masks for ppe
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7346791/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32838296
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matt.2020.07.006
work_keys_str_mv AT muelleramyv quantitativemethodforcomparativeassessmentofparticleremovalefficiencyoffabricmasksasalternativestostandardsurgicalmasksforppe
AT edenmatthewj quantitativemethodforcomparativeassessmentofparticleremovalefficiencyoffabricmasksasalternativestostandardsurgicalmasksforppe
AT oakesjessicam quantitativemethodforcomparativeassessmentofparticleremovalefficiencyoffabricmasksasalternativestostandardsurgicalmasksforppe
AT bellinichiara quantitativemethodforcomparativeassessmentofparticleremovalefficiencyoffabricmasksasalternativestostandardsurgicalmasksforppe
AT fernandezlorettaa quantitativemethodforcomparativeassessmentofparticleremovalefficiencyoffabricmasksasalternativestostandardsurgicalmasksforppe