Updated: December 12, 2020 9:51 AM IST
Washington [US], December 12 (ANI): While wearing a mask is an extremely essential measure to not only protect the user from the expulsion of particles that could carry SARS-CoV-2, some people, however, still refuse to wear a mask. The scientists then investigated the degree of protection of various types of consumer-grade and modified masks, assuming that the user was exposed to the new coronavirus, such as when we interacted with an infected person without a mask.
Scientists from the UNC School of Medicine, in collaboration with the Environmental Protection Agency, led the study published in the journal JAMA Internal Medicine.
Research shows that some masks were up to 79 percent effective at blocking particles that could carry the virus. These were masks made from two layers of woven nylon and fit comfortably on the wearer’s face. Unmodified medical procedure masks with earmuffs, also known as surgical masks, offered a filtration efficiency of 38.5%, but when the earmuffs were tied in a specific way to adjust the fit, the effectiveness improved to 60.3% . And when a layer of nylon was added, these masks were 80 percent effective.
“While modifications to surgical masks can improve filtering capabilities and reduce inhalation of airborne particles by improving mask fit, we demonstrated that the adjusted filtration efficiencies of many consumer masks were nearly equivalent to or better than surgical masks, “said co-author Phillip Clapp, PhD, inhalation toxicologist and assistant professor of pediatrics at UNC School of Medicine.
Co-first author Emily Sickbert-Bennett, PhD, director of infection prevention at UNC Medical Center, added: “Limiting the amount of virus is important because the more virus particles we are exposed to, the more likely we are to catch it. sick and potentially seriously ill. “
As the adoption of face coverings during the COVID-19 pandemic became common, there was a rapid expansion in public use of commercial, homemade, and makeshift masks that vary considerably in design, material, and construction. There have been a number of innovative “tricks”, devices, and mask enhancements that claim to improve the performance characteristics of conventional masks, generally surgical or procedural masks. Despite their wide spread and use during the pandemic, there have been few evaluations of the efficacy of these face coverings or mask enhancements in filtering airborne particles.
In this study, the researchers used a recently described methodological approach based on OSHA’s fit testing to determine the adjusted filtration efficiency (FFE) of a variety of makeshift and consumer face masks, as well as several popular modifications of procedural masks. doctors. Seven consumer grade masks and five medical procedure mask modifications were placed on an adult male, and FFE measurements were collected during a series of repeated movements of the torso, head, and facial muscles as described in the Protocol of OSHA quantitative fit test.
Here are the different types of face masks with filtration efficiency. Below is the top-of-the-line N-95 mask in bold, which proved to be 98 percent effective.
Consumer face masks:
2-layer woven nylon mask, ear loops, without aluminum nose bridge: 44.7%
2-layer woven nylon mask, earmuffs, with aluminum nose bridge: 56.7%
2-layer woven nylon mask, earmuffs, with nose bridge, 1 non-woven insert: 74.4%
2 back woven nylon mask, ear loops, with nose bridge, washed, without insert: 79%
Cotton bandana – Surgeon General style folded: 50%
Cotton handkerchief – folded “Bandit” style: 49%
Single Layer Woven Polyester Gaiter / Neck (Balaclava): 37.8%
Single-layer polyester / nylon mask with ties: 39.7%
Non-woven polypropylene mask with fixed earmuffs: 28.6%
Three-layer woven cotton mask with ear flaps: 26.5%
Medical face masks and modifications:
NIOSH approved N95 3M 9210 respirator: 98 percent
Surgical mask with ties: 71.4%
Procedural mask with earmuffs: 38.5%
Procedural mask with earmuffs + “tied ties and tucked corners”: 60.3%
Procedure mask with earmuffs + “Ear Guard”: 61.7%
Procedural mask with earmuffs + “23mm claw hair clip”: 64.8%
Procedure mask with earmuffs + “Fix-the Mask (3 elastic bands)”: 78.2%
Procedure mask with earmuffs + “nylon cuff”: 80.2%. (AND ME)