Assessment of best-selling respirators and masks: Do we have acceptable respiratory protection for the next pandemic?


Journal

American journal of infection control
ISSN: 1527-3296
Titre abrégé: Am J Infect Control
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8004854

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
04 2023
Historique:
received: 20 05 2022
revised: 22 06 2022
accepted: 25 06 2022
medline: 4 4 2023
pubmed: 29 7 2022
entrez: 28 7 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

COVID-19 pandemic caused a high demand for respiratory protection, caused a scarcity of approved respirators and the production of alternative respiratory protection. To raise public awareness through the scientific community, bestselling respirators and masks in the United States' leading online retailer, Amazon.com, were evaluated. Ten respirators and masks, 5 Face Protective Equipment (FPE) and 5 Cloth Face Masks (CFMs), were evaluated compared to the N95 standard. Two groups were established with the intention of comparing all masks together. The fractional efficiency and pressure drop were measured and compared to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) standards. In addition, grading factors for protection, comfort, and affordability were developed that can be used by the scientific community to readily disseminate to consumers for the selection of the appropriate respiratory protection. Two FPE provided acceptable efficiency (>95%) similar to the N95, while the remaining products were below or extremely below NIOSH standards. All products provided pressure drops within NIOSH standards (≤35 mmH The N95 remains the best respiratory protection, and in the event of the next airborne pandemic, FPEs could serve as adequate alternative protection against the viral spread.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
COVID-19 pandemic caused a high demand for respiratory protection, caused a scarcity of approved respirators and the production of alternative respiratory protection. To raise public awareness through the scientific community, bestselling respirators and masks in the United States' leading online retailer, Amazon.com, were evaluated.
METHODS
Ten respirators and masks, 5 Face Protective Equipment (FPE) and 5 Cloth Face Masks (CFMs), were evaluated compared to the N95 standard. Two groups were established with the intention of comparing all masks together. The fractional efficiency and pressure drop were measured and compared to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) standards. In addition, grading factors for protection, comfort, and affordability were developed that can be used by the scientific community to readily disseminate to consumers for the selection of the appropriate respiratory protection.
RESULTS
Two FPE provided acceptable efficiency (>95%) similar to the N95, while the remaining products were below or extremely below NIOSH standards. All products provided pressure drops within NIOSH standards (≤35 mmH
CONCLUSION
The N95 remains the best respiratory protection, and in the event of the next airborne pandemic, FPEs could serve as adequate alternative protection against the viral spread.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35901992
pii: S0196-6553(22)00536-3
doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2022.06.024
pmc: PMC9313532
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

388-395

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Omar Chaaban (O)

Department of Health Education and Promotion, College of Health and Human Performance, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC.

Jo Anne G Balanay (JAG)

Environmental Health Sciences Program, Department of Health Education and Promotion, College of Health and Human Performance, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC.

Sinan Sousan (S)

Department of Public Health, Brody School of Medicine, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC; North Carolina Agromedicine Institute, Greenville, NC. Electronic address: sousans18@ecu.edu.

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