在 COVID-19 大流行期间,比较 N95 过滤面罩呼吸器和改良外科口罩的向内泄漏率。

IF 4 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1265/ehpm.23-00303
Kazunari Onishi, Masanori Nojima
{"title":"在 COVID-19 大流行期间,比较 N95 过滤面罩呼吸器和改良外科口罩的向内泄漏率。","authors":"Kazunari Onishi, Masanori Nojima","doi":"10.1265/ehpm.23-00303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Owing to shortage of surgical and N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) during the COVID-2019 pandemic, various masks were developed to prevent infection. This study aimed to examine the inward leakage rate (ILR) of sealed face masks and modified surgical masks using a quantitative fit test and compared it with the ILR of unmodified N95 FFRs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted paired comparisons of ILRs of bent nose-fit wire masks, double masks, and N95 FFRs from October to December 2021. To measure the protective effectiveness of masks, participants wore masks, and the number of particles outside and inside the mask were measured. The ILR was based on the percentage of particles entering the mask using a fit tester.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We enrolled 54 participants (20 men and 34 women) in this study. The median ILR for surgical masks without and with a W-shaped bend in the nose-fit wire were 96.44% and 50.82%, respectively. The nose-fit wire adjustment reduced the ILR of surgical masks by a mean of 28.57%, which was significantly lower than the ILR without adjustment (P < 0.001). For double masks, with surgical or polyurethane masks on top of the W-shaped mask, the ILR did not differ significantly from that of N95. Although the filtration performance of double surgical masks matched that of N95 masks, their ILR was notably higher, indicating that double masks do not provide equivalent protection.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Wearing N95 masks alone is effective in many cases. However, surgical mask modifications do not guarantee consistent effectiveness. Properly selected, sealed masks with a good fit overcome leakage, emphasizing their crucial role. Without evidence, mask-wearing may lead to unexpected infections. Education based on quantitative data is crucial for preventing adverse outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":11707,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine","volume":"29 ","pages":"8"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10898862/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the inward leakage rate between N95 filtering facepiece respirators and modified surgical masks during the COVID-19 pandemic.\",\"authors\":\"Kazunari Onishi, Masanori Nojima\",\"doi\":\"10.1265/ehpm.23-00303\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Owing to shortage of surgical and N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) during the COVID-2019 pandemic, various masks were developed to prevent infection. This study aimed to examine the inward leakage rate (ILR) of sealed face masks and modified surgical masks using a quantitative fit test and compared it with the ILR of unmodified N95 FFRs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted paired comparisons of ILRs of bent nose-fit wire masks, double masks, and N95 FFRs from October to December 2021. To measure the protective effectiveness of masks, participants wore masks, and the number of particles outside and inside the mask were measured. The ILR was based on the percentage of particles entering the mask using a fit tester.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We enrolled 54 participants (20 men and 34 women) in this study. The median ILR for surgical masks without and with a W-shaped bend in the nose-fit wire were 96.44% and 50.82%, respectively. The nose-fit wire adjustment reduced the ILR of surgical masks by a mean of 28.57%, which was significantly lower than the ILR without adjustment (P < 0.001). For double masks, with surgical or polyurethane masks on top of the W-shaped mask, the ILR did not differ significantly from that of N95. Although the filtration performance of double surgical masks matched that of N95 masks, their ILR was notably higher, indicating that double masks do not provide equivalent protection.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Wearing N95 masks alone is effective in many cases. However, surgical mask modifications do not guarantee consistent effectiveness. Properly selected, sealed masks with a good fit overcome leakage, emphasizing their crucial role. Without evidence, mask-wearing may lead to unexpected infections. Education based on quantitative data is crucial for preventing adverse outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11707,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine\",\"volume\":\"29 \",\"pages\":\"8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10898862/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1265/ehpm.23-00303\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1265/ehpm.23-00303","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在 COVID-2019 大流行期间,由于外科口罩和 N95 过滤面罩呼吸器(FFR)短缺,人们开发了各种口罩来预防感染。本研究旨在使用定量密合度测试法检测密封口罩和改良外科口罩的向内泄漏率(ILR),并将其与未改良的 N95 FFRs 的向内泄漏率进行比较:我们在 2021 年 10 月至 12 月期间对弯鼻钢丝口罩、双层口罩和 N95 FFR 的内渗率进行了配对比较。为了测量口罩的防护效果,参与者戴上口罩,测量口罩内外的颗粒数量。ILR是根据使用密合度测试仪测量进入口罩的微粒百分比得出的:本研究共招募了 54 名参与者(20 名男性和 34 名女性)。不带和带 W 形弯曲鼻导线的外科口罩的 ILR 中位数分别为 96.44% 和 50.82%。鼻翼贴合线调整后,手术口罩的平均 ILR 降低了 28.57%,明显低于未做调整的 ILR(P < 0.001)。对于双层口罩,即在 W 型口罩上再加上外科口罩或聚氨酯口罩,ILR 与 N95 没有显著差异。虽然双层外科口罩的过滤性能与 N95 口罩相当,但其 ILR 明显更高,这表明双层口罩不能提供同等的保护:结论:在许多情况下,单独佩戴 N95 口罩是有效的。结论:在许多情况下,单独佩戴 N95 口罩是有效的,但外科口罩的改装并不能保证始终有效。选择正确、密封且佩戴合适的口罩可以克服泄漏问题,这强调了口罩的关键作用。在没有证据的情况下,佩戴口罩可能会导致意想不到的感染。基于量化数据的教育对于预防不良后果至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of the inward leakage rate between N95 filtering facepiece respirators and modified surgical masks during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: Owing to shortage of surgical and N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) during the COVID-2019 pandemic, various masks were developed to prevent infection. This study aimed to examine the inward leakage rate (ILR) of sealed face masks and modified surgical masks using a quantitative fit test and compared it with the ILR of unmodified N95 FFRs.

Methods: We conducted paired comparisons of ILRs of bent nose-fit wire masks, double masks, and N95 FFRs from October to December 2021. To measure the protective effectiveness of masks, participants wore masks, and the number of particles outside and inside the mask were measured. The ILR was based on the percentage of particles entering the mask using a fit tester.

Results: We enrolled 54 participants (20 men and 34 women) in this study. The median ILR for surgical masks without and with a W-shaped bend in the nose-fit wire were 96.44% and 50.82%, respectively. The nose-fit wire adjustment reduced the ILR of surgical masks by a mean of 28.57%, which was significantly lower than the ILR without adjustment (P < 0.001). For double masks, with surgical or polyurethane masks on top of the W-shaped mask, the ILR did not differ significantly from that of N95. Although the filtration performance of double surgical masks matched that of N95 masks, their ILR was notably higher, indicating that double masks do not provide equivalent protection.

Conclusions: Wearing N95 masks alone is effective in many cases. However, surgical mask modifications do not guarantee consistent effectiveness. Properly selected, sealed masks with a good fit overcome leakage, emphasizing their crucial role. Without evidence, mask-wearing may lead to unexpected infections. Education based on quantitative data is crucial for preventing adverse outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine
Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
2.10%
发文量
44
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: The official journal of the Japanese Society for Hygiene, Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine (EHPM) brings a comprehensive approach to prevention and environmental health related to medical, biological, molecular biological, genetic, physical, psychosocial, chemical, and other environmental factors. Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine features definitive studies on human health sciences and provides comprehensive and unique information to a worldwide readership.
期刊最新文献
Association between temperature and mortality: a multi-city time series study in Sichuan Basin, southwest China. Presenteeism and social interaction in the "new normal" in Japan: a longitudinal questionnaire study. Seasonal variations of the prevalence of metabolic syndrome and its markers using big-data of health check-ups. Challenges in health risk assessment of multiple chemical exposures in epidemiological studies. Not only baseline but cumulative exposure of remnant cholesterol predicts the development of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a cohort study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1