Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33567665›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Comparative Performance Testing of Respirator versus Surgical Mask Using a Water Droplet Spray Model.

Paul T J Scheepers, Heiman F L Wertheim, Maurice van Dael, Rob Anzion, Henk Jan Holterman, Steven Teerenstra, Martijn de Groot, Andreas Voss, Joost Hopman

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Paul T J ScheepersDepartment for Health Evidence, Research Laboratory Molecular Epidemiology, 6500 HB Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8546-2161
Heiman F L WertheimDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Radboudumc, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Maurice van DaelDepartment for Health Evidence, Research Laboratory Molecular Epidemiology, 6500 HB Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3905-6485
Rob AnzionDepartment for Health Evidence, Research Laboratory Molecular Epidemiology, 6500 HB Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Henk Jan HoltermanWageningen Plant Research, Wageningen University and Research, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5874-3606
Steven TeerenstraDepartment for Health Evidence, Section Biostatistics, Radboudumc, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Martijn de GrootRadboudumc REshape Center, Radboudumc, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1294-698X
Andreas VossDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Radboudumc, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0689-3773
Joost HopmanDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Radboudumc, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLWageningen University & Research · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, there was shortage of the standard respiratory protective equipment (RPE). The aim of this study was to develop a procedure to test the performance of alternative RPEs used in the care of COVID-19 patients.

methodsA laboratory-based test was developed to compare RPEs by total inward leakage (TIL). We used a crossflow nebulizer to produce a jet spray of 1-100 µm water droplets with a fluorescent marker. The RPEs were placed on a dummy head and sprayed at distances of 30 and 60 cm. The outcome was determined as the recovery of the fluorescent marker on a membrane filter placed on the mouth of the dummy head.

resultsAt 30 cm, a type IIR surgical mask gave a 17.7% lower TIL compared with an FFP2 respirator. At 60 cm, this difference was similar, with a 21.7% lower TIL for the surgical mask compared to the respirator. When adding a face shield, the TIL at 30 cm was further reduced by 9.5% for the respirator and 16.6% in the case of the surgical mask.

conclusionsA safe, fast and very sensitive test method was developed to assess the effectiveness of RPE by comparison under controlled conditions.

Indexed as

AerosolsCOVID-19HumansInfectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-ProfessionalMasksOccupational ExposurePersonal Protective EquipmentRespiratory Protective DevicesSARS-CoV-2Ventilators, MechanicalWaterAerosolsWateraerosolsCOVID-19 pandemicparticle size distributionrespiratory protective equipmentvirus transmission

Identifiers

PMID33567665
PMCPMC7915861
OpenAlexW3128030916

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.