2022•Unpublished venueRequires access

High level bioprotection against infective aerosols: How medical face masks compare against respirators

Christian Sterr, Aline Dick, Lena Schellenberger, Julian Zirbes, Claudia Nonnenmacher-Winter, F. A. Günther

Open publisher page 0 citations

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 bioprotection 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 94.45±4.47 (SD) % followed by medical masks 92.83±3.34 (SD) % and KN95 respirators 90.08±6.64% (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 bioprotection 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.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

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 bioprotection 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 94.45±4.47 (SD) % followed by medical masks 92.83±3.34 (SD) % and KN95 respirators 90.08±6.64% (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 bioprotection 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.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available 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 bioprotection 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 94.45±4.47 (SD) % followed by medical masks 92.83±3.34 (SD) % and KN95 respirators 90.08±6.64% (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 bioprotection 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.

Key concepts: Respirator, Face masks, Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), 2019-20 coronavirus outbreak, Medicine, Environmental science, Virology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
High level bioprotection against infective aerosols: How medical face masks compare against respirators — Research Paper | ScholarLens