Cargando…

Particle Filtration Efficiency Testing of Sterilization Wrap Masks

OBJECTIVES: Non-traditional materials are used for mask construction to address personal protective equipment shortages during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Reusable masks made from surgical sterilization wrap represent such an innovative approach with social media frequently ref...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chau, Destiny F., O’Shaughnessy, Patrick, Schmitz, Michael L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Society for Preventive Medicine 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7939758/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33618497
http://dx.doi.org/10.3961/jpmph.20.394
_version_ 1783661807896887296
author Chau, Destiny F.
O’Shaughnessy, Patrick
Schmitz, Michael L.
author_facet Chau, Destiny F.
O’Shaughnessy, Patrick
Schmitz, Michael L.
author_sort Chau, Destiny F.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Non-traditional materials are used for mask construction to address personal protective equipment shortages during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Reusable masks made from surgical sterilization wrap represent such an innovative approach with social media frequently referring to them as “N95 alternatives.” This material was tested for particle filtration efficiency and breathability to clarify what role they might have in infection prevention and control. METHODS: A heavyweight, double layer sterilization wrap was tested when new and after 2, 4, 6, and 10 autoclave sterilizing cycles and compared with an approved N95 respirator and a surgical mask via testing procedures using a sodium chloride aerosol for N95 efficiency testing similar to 42 CFR 84.181. Pressure testing to indicate breathability was also conducted. RESULTS: The particle filtration efficiency for the sterilization wrap ranged between 58% to 66%, with similar performance when new and after sterilizing cycles. The N95 respirator and surgical mask performed at 95% and 68% respectively. Pressure drops for the sterilization wrap, N95 and surgical mask were 10.4 mmH(2)O, 5.9 mmH(2)O, and 5.1 mmH(2)O, respectively, well below the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health limits of 35 mmH(2)O during initial inhalation and 25 mmH(2)O during initial exhalation. CONCLUSIONS: The sterilization wrap’s particle filtration efficiency is much lower than a N95 respirator, but falls within the range of a surgical mask, with acceptable breathability. Performance testing of non-traditional mask materials is crucial to determine potential protection efficacy and for correcting misinterpretation propagated through popular media.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7939758
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Korean Society for Preventive Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79397582021-03-15 Particle Filtration Efficiency Testing of Sterilization Wrap Masks Chau, Destiny F. O’Shaughnessy, Patrick Schmitz, Michael L. J Prev Med Public Health COVID-19: Brief Report OBJECTIVES: Non-traditional materials are used for mask construction to address personal protective equipment shortages during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Reusable masks made from surgical sterilization wrap represent such an innovative approach with social media frequently referring to them as “N95 alternatives.” This material was tested for particle filtration efficiency and breathability to clarify what role they might have in infection prevention and control. METHODS: A heavyweight, double layer sterilization wrap was tested when new and after 2, 4, 6, and 10 autoclave sterilizing cycles and compared with an approved N95 respirator and a surgical mask via testing procedures using a sodium chloride aerosol for N95 efficiency testing similar to 42 CFR 84.181. Pressure testing to indicate breathability was also conducted. RESULTS: The particle filtration efficiency for the sterilization wrap ranged between 58% to 66%, with similar performance when new and after sterilizing cycles. The N95 respirator and surgical mask performed at 95% and 68% respectively. Pressure drops for the sterilization wrap, N95 and surgical mask were 10.4 mmH(2)O, 5.9 mmH(2)O, and 5.1 mmH(2)O, respectively, well below the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health limits of 35 mmH(2)O during initial inhalation and 25 mmH(2)O during initial exhalation. CONCLUSIONS: The sterilization wrap’s particle filtration efficiency is much lower than a N95 respirator, but falls within the range of a surgical mask, with acceptable breathability. Performance testing of non-traditional mask materials is crucial to determine potential protection efficacy and for correcting misinterpretation propagated through popular media. Korean Society for Preventive Medicine 2021-01 2020-12-22 /pmc/articles/PMC7939758/ /pubmed/33618497 http://dx.doi.org/10.3961/jpmph.20.394 Text en Copyright © 2021 The Korean Society for Preventive Medicine This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle COVID-19: Brief Report
Chau, Destiny F.
O’Shaughnessy, Patrick
Schmitz, Michael L.
Particle Filtration Efficiency Testing of Sterilization Wrap Masks
title Particle Filtration Efficiency Testing of Sterilization Wrap Masks
title_full Particle Filtration Efficiency Testing of Sterilization Wrap Masks
title_fullStr Particle Filtration Efficiency Testing of Sterilization Wrap Masks
title_full_unstemmed Particle Filtration Efficiency Testing of Sterilization Wrap Masks
title_short Particle Filtration Efficiency Testing of Sterilization Wrap Masks
title_sort particle filtration efficiency testing of sterilization wrap masks
topic COVID-19: Brief Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7939758/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33618497
http://dx.doi.org/10.3961/jpmph.20.394
work_keys_str_mv AT chaudestinyf particlefiltrationefficiencytestingofsterilizationwrapmasks
AT oshaughnessypatrick particlefiltrationefficiencytestingofsterilizationwrapmasks
AT schmitzmichaell particlefiltrationefficiencytestingofsterilizationwrapmasks