ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Impact of Wearing on Filtration Performance of Electrostatic Filter Face Masks.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Mask Protection against Inhaling Wildfire Smoke, Allergenic Bioaerosols, and Infectious Particles.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Certified disposable respirators afford important protection from hazardous aerosols but lose performance as they are worn. This study examines the effect of wear time on filtration efficiency. Disposable respirators were worn by CSIRO staff over a period of 4 weeks in early 2020. Participants wore the respirator masks for given times up to eight hours whilst working in laboratory/office environments. At that time COVID-19 precautions required staff to wear surgical (or other) masks and increase use of hand sanitizer from dispenser stations. Results obtained from a test group of ten individuals without health preconditions show an increasing number of masks failing with wear time, while the remainder continue to perform nearly unaffected for up to 8 h. Some masks were found to retain filtration performance better than others, possibly due to the type of challenge they were subjected to by the wearer. However, the rate and extent of decay are expected to differ between environments since there are many contributing factors and properties of the aerosol challenge cannot be controlled in a live trial. Penetration and variability increased during wear; the longer the wear time, the more deleterious to particle removal, particularly after approximately 2 h of wear. This behavior is captured in a descriptive statistical model based on results from a trial with this test group. The effectiveness of the masks in preventing the penetration of KCl particles was determined before and after wearing, with the analysis focusing on the most penetrating particles in a size range of 0.3-0.5 µm diameter where respirator masks are most vulnerable. The basic elements of the study, including the approach to filter testing and sample sanitization, are broadly applicable. Conclusions also have applicability to typical commercially available single-use respirator masks manufactured from melt blown polypropylene as they are reliant on the same physical principles for particle capture and electrostatic enhancement was comparable for the particle size range used for detection.
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.