SynthesisPloS one2020
Exploring options for reprocessing of N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators (N95-FFRs) amidst COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Conservation Practices for Personal Protective Equipment: A Systematic Review with Focus on Lower-Income Countries.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Pooled it
- Mask decontamination methods (model N95) for respiratory protection: a rapid review.Systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Computational modeling for PPE filtration: Informed by material characterization, microbial penetration, and particle mechanics.Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene · 2025Article
- [Hygiene and infection prevention in disaster events with decompensated crisis treatment].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Evaluation of the effectiveness of UV-C dose for photoinactivation of SARS-CoV-2 in contaminated N95 respirator, surgical and cotton fabric masks.Photochemical & photobiological sciences : Official journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology · 2022Article
- High-quality and easy-to-regenerate personal filter.PloS one · 2022Article
- Effective inactivation ofJournal of analytical science and technology · 2022Article
- Decontamination and reuse of personal protective masks and respirators in healthcare: Human-centered investigation and implementation considerations.Human factors in healthcare · 2021Article
- Principles and practice for SARS-CoV-2 decontamination of N95 masks with UV-C.Biophysical journal · 2021Review
- Article
- Pulsed Broad-Spectrum UV Light Effectively Inactivates SARS-CoV-2 on Multiple Surfaces and N95 Material.Viruses · 2021Article
- Ultraviolet-C as a Viable Reprocessing Method for Disposable Masks and Filtering Facepiece Respirators.Polymers · 2021Review
- Low Incidence and Mortality by SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Healthcare Workers in a Health National Center in Mexico: Successful Establishment of an Occupational Medicine Program.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Evaluation of expelled droplets through traditional Islamic face coverings.Annals of Saudi medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is global shortage of Personal Protective Equipment due to COVID-19 pandemic. N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators (N95-FFRs) provide respiratory protection against respiratory pathogens including SARS-CoV-2. There is scant literature on reprocessing methods which can enable reuse of N95-FFRs.
aimWe conducted this study to evaluate research done, prior to COVID-19 pandemic, on various decontamination methods for reprocessing of N95-FFRs.
methodsWe searched 5 electronic databases (Pubmed, Google Scholar, Crossref, Ovid, ScienceDirect) and 1 Grey literature database (OpenGrey). We included original studies, published prior to year 2020, which had evaluated any decontamination method on FFRs. Studies had evaluated a reprocessing method against parameters namely physical changes, user acceptability, respirator fit, filter efficiency, microbicidal efficacy and presence of chemical residues post-reprocessing. FINDINGS AND
conclusionsOverall, we found 7887 records amongst which 17 original research articles were finally included for qualitative analysis. Overall, 21 different types of decontamination or reprocessing methods for N95-FFRs were evaluated. Most commonly evaluated method for reprocessing of FFRs was Ultraviolet (Type-C) irradiation (UVGI) which was evaluated in 13/17 (76%) studies. We found published literature was scant on this topic despite warning signs of pandemic of a respiratory illness over the years. Promising technologies requiring expeditious evaluation are UVGI, Microwave generated steam (MGS) and based on Hydrogen peroxide vapor. Global presence of technologies, which have been given Emergency use authorisation for N95-FFR reprocessing, is extremely limited. Reprocessing of N95-FFRs by MGS should be considered for emergency implementation in resource limited settings to tackle shortage of N95-FFRs. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW IDENTIFIER: PROSPERO, PROSPERO ID: CRD42020189684, (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020189684).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.