Transmission of aerosols through pristine and reprocessed N95 respirators
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
During the Covid-19 pandemic, pristine and reprocessed N95 respirators are crucial equipment towards limiting nosocomial infections. The NIOSH test certifying the N95 rating, however, poorly simulates aerosols in healthcare settings, limiting our understanding of the exposure risk for healthcare workers wearing these masks, especially reprocessed ones. We used experimental conditions that simulated the sizes, densities and airflow properties of infectious aerosols in healthcare settings. We analyzed the penetration and leakage of aerosols through pristine and reprocessed N95 respirators. Seven reprocessing methods were investigated. Our findings suggest that pristine and properly reprocessed N95 respirators effectively limit exposure to infectious aerosols, but that care must be taken to avoid the elucidated degradation mechanisms and limit noncompliant wear.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.14.20094821: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not 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 …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.14.20094821: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not 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.
- Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.
-
