A Sew-Free Origami Mask for Improvised Respiratory Protection

  1. Jonathan Realmuto
  2. Michael T. Kleinman
  3. Terence Sanger
  4. Michael J. Lawler
  5. James N. Smith

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Recently, respiratory aerosols with diameters smaller than 100 µ m have been confirmed as important vectors for the spread of SARS-CoV-2. While cloth masks afford some protection for larger ballistic droplets, they are typically inefficient at filtering these aerosols and require specialized fabrication devices to produce. We describe a fabrication technique that makes use of a folding procedure (origami) to transform a filtration material into a mask. These origami masks can be fabricated by non-experts at minimal cost and effort, provide adequate filtration efficiencies, and are easily scaled to different facial sizes. Using a mannequin fit test simulator, we demonstrate that these masks can provide optimal filtration efficiency and ease of breathing with minimal leakage. Because this mask provides greater comfort compared to commercial alternatives, it is likely to promote greater mask wearing tolerance and acceptance.

Article activity feed

  1. Rapid Reviews Infectious Diseases

    Peter Germonpre

    Review 2: "A Sew-Free Origami Mask for Improvised Respiratory Protection"

    This preprint offers a sew-free approach for face mask production in a low-resource setting. The data offered substantiates claims concerning design and material choice, but further experiments are needed to substantiate claims related to comfort and N-95 comparison.

  2. Rapid Reviews Infectious Diseases

    Cary Hill

    Review 1: "A Sew-Free Origami Mask for Improvised Respiratory Protection"

    This preprint offers a sew-free approach for face mask production in a low-resource setting. The data offered substantiates claims concerning design and material choice, but further experiments are needed to substantiate claims related to comfort and N-95 comparison.

  4. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.09.29.20204115: (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.

  5. Version published to 10.1101/2020.09.29.20204115v1 on medRxiv