Evaluation of Cloth Masks and Modified Procedure Masks as Personal Protective Equipment for the Public During the COVID-19 Pandemic.


Journal

JAMA internal medicine
ISSN: 2168-6114
Titre abrégé: JAMA Intern Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101589534

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 04 2021
Historique:
pubmed: 11 12 2020
medline: 16 4 2021
entrez: 10 12 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the general public has been advised to wear masks or improvised face coverings to limit transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, there has been considerable confusion and disagreement regarding the degree to which masks protect the wearer from airborne particles. To evaluate the fitted filtration efficiency (FFE) of various consumer-grade and improvised face masks, as well as several popular modifications of medical procedure masks that are intended to improve mask fit or comfort. For this study conducted in a research laboratory between June and August 2020, 7 consumer-grade masks and 5 medical procedure mask modifications were fitted on an adult male volunteer, and FFE measurements were collected during a series of repeated movements of the torso, head, and facial muscles as outlined by the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration Quantitative Fit Testing Protocol. The consumer-grade masks tested included (1) a 2-layer nylon mask with ear loops that was tested with an optional aluminum nose bridge and filter insert in place, (2) a cotton bandana folded diagonally once (ie, "bandit" style) or in a (3) multilayer rectangle according to the instructions presented by the US Surgeon General, (4) a single-layer polyester/nylon mask with ties, (5) a polypropylene mask with fixed ear loops, (6) a single-layer polyester gaiter/neck cover balaclava bandana, and (7) a 3-layer cotton mask with ear loops. Medical procedure mask modifications included (1) tying the mask's ear loops and tucking in the side pleats, (2) fastening ear loops behind the head with 3-dimensional-printed ear guards, (3) fastening ear loops behind the head with a claw-type hair clip, (4) enhancing the mask/face seal with rubber bands over the mask, and (5) enhancing the mask/face seal with a band of nylon hosiery over the fitted mask. The primary study outcome was the measured FFE of common consumer-grade and improvised face masks, as well as several popular modifications of medical procedure masks. The mean (SD) FFE of consumer grade masks tested on 1 adult male with no beard ranged from 79.0% (4.3%) to 26.5% (10.5%), with the 2-layer nylon mask having the highest FFE. Unmodified medical procedure masks with ear loops had a mean (SD) FFE of 38.5% (11.2%). All modifications evaluated in this study increased procedure mask FFE (range [SD], 60.3% [11.1%] to 80.2% [3.1%]), with a nylon hosiery sleeve placed over the procedure mask producing the greatest improvement. While modifications to improve medical procedure mask fit can enhance the filtering capability and reduce inhalation of airborne particles, this study demonstrates that the FFEs of consumer-grade masks available to the public are, in many cases, nearly equivalent to or better than their non-N95 respirator medical mask counterparts.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33300948
pii: 2774266
doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.8168
pmc: PMC7729588
doi:

Substances chimiques

Nylons 0
Polyesters 0
Polypropylenes 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

463-469

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn
Type : ErratumIn

Auteurs

Phillip W Clapp (PW)

Department of Pediatrics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.
Center for Environmental Medicine, Asthma and Lung Biology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.

Emily E Sickbert-Bennett (EE)

UNC Health Care, Infection Prevention Department, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

James M Samet (JM)

Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

Jon Berntsen (J)

TRC, Raleigh, North Carolina.

Kirby L Zeman (KL)

Center for Environmental Medicine, Asthma and Lung Biology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.

Deverick J Anderson (DJ)

Duke Center for Antimicrobial Stewardship and Infection Prevention, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.

David J Weber (DJ)

UNC Health Care, Infection Prevention Department, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.

William D Bennett (WD)

Center for Environmental Medicine, Asthma and Lung Biology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.
Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH