High Level Bioaerosol Protection against Infective Aerosols: How Medical Face Masks Compare against Respirators.

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q3 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Christian M Sterr, Aline Dick, Lena Schellenberger, Julian Zirbes, Claudia Nonnenmacher-Winter, Frank Günther
{"title":"High Level Bioaerosol Protection against Infective Aerosols: How Medical Face Masks Compare against Respirators.","authors":"Christian M Sterr,&nbsp;Aline Dick,&nbsp;Lena Schellenberger,&nbsp;Julian Zirbes,&nbsp;Claudia Nonnenmacher-Winter,&nbsp;Frank Günther","doi":"10.1155/2022/6978661","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Face masks and respirators are commonly used to prevent the transmission of infectious diseases that spread by respiratory droplets and aerosols. However, there is still uncertainty about the protective effect of the different types of masks against virus containing aerosols. To determine the as-worn bioaerosol protection efficacy of different face coverings and estimate the possible protective function against airborne diseases, we challenged different respirators and medical masks on a standardized dummy head with a bioaerosol containing MS2 bacteriophages as virus surrogates. In our experiments, FFP2 respirators showed the highest filtration efficacy 94 ± 4 (SD) % followed by medical masks 93 ± 3 (SD) % and KN95 respirators 90 ± 7 (SD) %. Nevertheless, we found no statistically significant difference between respirators and medical masks in terms of provided protection against infective aerosols. Our findings indicate that both respirators and medical masks provide a high as-worn bioaerosol protection efficacy against virus containing aerosols, and therefore, a very high protection against airborne diseases. Considering the higher comfort, better availability, and lower price of medical masks in contrast to respirators, it is recommendable to use medical face masks especially in low risk situations and in general public.</p>","PeriodicalId":50715,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Infectious Diseases & Medical Microbiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9617726/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Infectious Diseases & Medical Microbiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6978661","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Face masks and respirators are commonly used to prevent the transmission of infectious diseases that spread by respiratory droplets and aerosols. However, there is still uncertainty about the protective effect of the different types of masks against virus containing aerosols. To determine the as-worn bioaerosol protection efficacy of different face coverings and estimate the possible protective function against airborne diseases, we challenged different respirators and medical masks on a standardized dummy head with a bioaerosol containing MS2 bacteriophages as virus surrogates. In our experiments, FFP2 respirators showed the highest filtration efficacy 94 ± 4 (SD) % followed by medical masks 93 ± 3 (SD) % and KN95 respirators 90 ± 7 (SD) %. Nevertheless, we found no statistically significant difference between respirators and medical masks in terms of provided protection against infective aerosols. Our findings indicate that both respirators and medical masks provide a high as-worn bioaerosol protection efficacy against virus containing aerosols, and therefore, a very high protection against airborne diseases. Considering the higher comfort, better availability, and lower price of medical masks in contrast to respirators, it is recommendable to use medical face masks especially in low risk situations and in general public.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

高水平生物气溶胶防护传染性气溶胶:医用口罩与呼吸器的比较。
口罩和呼吸器通常用于防止通过呼吸道飞沫和气溶胶传播的传染病的传播。然而,不同类型的口罩对含有病毒的气溶胶的保护作用仍然存在不确定性。为了确定不同面罩的生物气溶胶防护效果,并评估对空气传播疾病可能的防护功能,我们用含有MS2噬菌体的生物气溶胶作为病毒替代品,在标准化假头上挑战了不同的呼吸器和医用口罩。实验中,FFP2口罩的过滤效率最高(94±4)%,其次是医用口罩(93±3)%,KN95口罩(90±7)%。然而,我们发现呼吸器和医用口罩在提供对传染性气溶胶的保护方面没有统计学上的显着差异。我们的研究结果表明,呼吸器和医用口罩对含病毒的气溶胶都有很高的生物气溶胶防护效果,因此对空气传播疾病有很高的防护作用。考虑到医用口罩比呼吸器更舒适、更容易获得、价格更低,建议在低风险情况下和一般公共场合使用医用口罩。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
108
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Canadian Journal of Infectious Diseases and Medical Microbiology is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies related to infectious diseases of bacterial, viral and parasitic origin. The journal welcomes articles describing research on pathogenesis, epidemiology of infection, diagnosis and treatment, antibiotics and resistance, and immunology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信