Hydrogen peroxide vapor decontamination of N95 respirators for reuse

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

Objective:

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to global shortages of N95 respirators. Reprocessing of used N95 respirators may provide a higher filtration crisis alternative, but whether effective sterilization can be achieved for a virus without impairing respirator function remains unknown. We evaluated the viricidal efficacy of Bioquell vaporized hydrogen peroxide (VHP) on contaminated N95 respirators and tested the particulate particle penetration and inhalation and exhalation resistance of respirators after multiple cycles of VHP.

Methods:

For this study, 3M 1870 N95 respirators were contaminated with 3 aerosolized bacteriophages: T1, T7, and Pseudomonas phage phi-6 followed by 1 cycle of VHP decontamination using a BQ-50 system. Additionally, new and unused respirators were sent to an independent laboratory for particulate filter penetration testing and inhalation and exhalation resistance after 3 and 5 cycles of VHP.

Results:

A single VHP cycle resulted in complete eradication of bacteriophage from respirators (limit of detection 10 PFU). Respirators showed acceptable limits for inhalation/exhalation resistance after 3 and 5 cycles of VHP. Respirators demonstrated a filtration efficiency >99 % after 3 cycles, but filtration efficiency fell below 95% after 5 cycles of HPV.

Conclusion:

Bioquell VHP demonstrated high viricidal activity for N95 respirators inoculated with aerosolized bacteriophages. Bioquell technology can be scaled for simultaneous decontamination of a large number of used but otherwise intact respirators. Reprocessing should be limited to 3 cycles due to concerns both about impact of clinical wear and tear on fit, and to decrement in filtration after 3 cycles.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2020.03.24.20041087: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.


    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.


    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.