National Center for Biotechnology Information
Background: Respiratory protection devices are used to protect the wearers from inhaling particles suspended in the air. Filtering face piece respirators are usually tested utilizing nonbiologic particles, whereas their use often aims at reducing exposure to biologic aerosols, including infectious agents such as viruses and bacteria.
Methods: The performance of 2 types of N95 half-mask, filtering face piece respirators and 2 types of surgical masks were determined. The collection efficiency of these respiratory protection devices was investigated using MS2 virus (a nonharmful simulant of several pathogens). The virions were detected in the particle size range of 10 to 80 nm.
Results: The results indicate that the penetration of virions through the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)-certified N95 respirators can exceed an expected level of 5%. As anticipated, the tested surgical masks showed a much higher particle penetration because they are known to be less efficient than the N95 respirators. The 2 surgical masks, which originated from the same manufacturer, showed tremendously different penetration levels of the MS2 virions: 20.5% and 84.5%, respectively, at an inhalation flow rate of 85 L/min.
Conclusion: The N95 filtering face piece respirators may not provide the expected protection level against small virions. Some surgical masks may let a significant fraction of airborne viruses penetrate through their filters, providing very low protection against aerosolized infectious agents in the size range of 10 to 80 nm. It should be noted that the surgical masks are primarily designed to protect the environment from the wearer, whereas the respirators are supposed to protect the wearer from the environment.
DOUBT ME CLICK “MORE” TO SEE links to over 100 article and sources……
Similar articles
-
Ann Occup Hyg. 2006 Apr;50(3):259-69. doi: 10.1093/annhyg/mei058. Epub 2005 Dec 12. PMID: 16344291
-
Comparison of performance of three different types of respiratory protection devices.
J Occup Environ Hyg. 2006 Sep;3(9):465-74. doi: 10.1080/15459620600829211. PMID: 16857645 -
Using half-facepiece respirators for H1N1.
Occup Health Saf. 2009 Nov;78(11):22, 24. PMID: 19927872 -
CMAJ. 2016 May 17;188(8):567-574. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.150835. Epub 2016 Mar 7. PMID: 26952529 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Am J Infect Control. 2008 Mar;36(2):135-41. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2007.04.284. PMID: 18313516 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by 72 articles
-
Face masks in radiation oncology clinics: based on evidence or source of mistakes?
Med Oncol. 2020 Aug 1;37(9):76. doi: 10.1007/s12032-020-01403-8. PMID: 32740875 Free PMC article. -
Am J Infect Control. 2020 Jul 28:S0196-6553(20)30727-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2020.07.022. Online ahead of print. PMID: 32735810 Free PMC article.
-
J Hosp Infect. 2020 Jul 17;106(1):163-75. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2020.07.014. Online ahead of print. PMID: 32687870 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Opportunities for biomaterials to address the challenges of COVID-19.
J Biomed Mater Res A. 2020 Oct;108(10):1974-1990. doi: 10.1002/jbm.a.37059. Epub 2020 Aug 4. PMID: 32662571 Free PMC article. Review. -
Filtration Performance of FDA-Cleared Surgical Masks.
J Int Soc Respir Prot. 2009 Spring-Summer;26(3):54-70. PMID: 32661453 Free PMC article.