Simple fabrication of an electrospun polystyrene microfiber filter that meets N95 filtering facepiece respirator filtration and breathability standards.

During the global spread of COVID-19, high demand and limited availability of melt-blown filtration material led to a manufacturing backlog of N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators (FFRs). This shortfall prompted the search for alternative filter materials that could be quickly mass produced while meeting N95 FFR filtration and breathability performance standards. Here, an unsupported, nonwoven layer of uncharged polystyrene (PS) microfibers was produced via electrospinning that achieves N95 performance standards based on physical parameters (e.g., filter thickness) alone. PS microfibers 3-6 µm in diameter and deposited in an ~5 mm thick filter layer are favorable for use in FFRs, achieving high filtration efficiencies (≥97.5%) and low pressure drops (≤15 mm H2O). The PS microfiber filter demonstrates durability upon disinfection with hydroxyl radicals (•OH), maintaining high filtration efficiencies and low pressure drops over six rounds of disinfection. Additionally, the PS microfibers exhibit antibacterial activity (1-log removal of E. coli) and can be modified readily through integration of silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) during electrospinning to enhance their activity (≥3-log removal at 25 wt% AgNP integration). Because of their tunable performance, potential reusability with disinfection, and antimicrobial properties, these electrospun PS microfibers may represent a suitable, alternative filter material for use in N95 FFRs.

Review and demonstration of equations applied to models of filtering facepiece respirator particle capture efficiency.

The use of filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) of various types increased dramatically by both workers and the public during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. This increased use has, likewise, instigated a proliferation of research on the qualities of FFRs. An aspect of FFR development and optimization involves the use of mathematical models that predict filter efficiency based on various filter characteristics while also considering a number of particle capture forces. An evaluation of current literature failed to identify a publication that provides a comprehensive assessment of the models developed to predict filter efficiency. The purpose of this review was, therefore, to describe models developed to include the forces associated with diffusion, interception, impaction, and electrostatic attraction as they contribute to the efficiency of an entire filter. The literature review was augmented with figures created with the use of many of the models discussed to compare different models of the same force as well as to illustrate the influence of electrostatic forces on overall filter efficiency.

Characterization of performance and disinfection resilience of nonwoven filter materials for use in 3D-printed N95 respirators.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a high demand for respiratory protection among health care workers in hospitals, especially surgical N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs). To aid in alleviating that demand, a survey of commercially available filter media was conducted to determine whether any could serve as a substitute for an N95 FFR while held in a 3D-printed mask (Stopgap Surgical Face Mask from the NIH 3D Print Exchange). Fourteen filter media types and eight combinations were evaluated for filtration efficiency, breathing resistance (pressure drop), and liquid penetration. Additional testing was conducted to evaluate two filter media disinfection methods in the event that the filters were reused in a hospital setting. Efficiency testing was conducted in accordance with the procedures established for approving an N95 FFR. One apparatus used a filter-holding device and another apparatus employed a manikin head to which the 3D-printed mask could be sealed. The filter media and combinations exhibited collection efficiencies varied between 3.9% and 98.8% when tested with a face velocity comparable to that of a standard N95 FFR at the 85 L min-1 used in the approval procedure. Breathing resistance varied between 10.8 to >637 Pa (1.1 to > 65 mm H2O). When applied to the 3D-printed mask efficiency decreased by an average of 13% and breathing resistance increased 4-fold as a result of the smaller surface area of the filter media when held in that mask compared to that of an N95 FFR. Disinfection by dry heat, even after 25 cycles, did not significantly affect filter efficiency and reduced viral infectivity by > 99.9%. However, 10 cycles of 59% vaporized H2O2 significantly (p < 0.001) reduced filter efficiency of the media tested. Several commercially available filter media were found to be potential replacements for the media used to construct the typical cup-like N95 FFR. However, their use in the 3D-printed mask demonstrated reduced efficiency and increased breathing resistance at 85 L min-1.

Particle Filtration Efficiency Testing of Sterilization Wrap Masks.

OBJECTIVES: Non-traditional materials are used for mask construction to address personal protective equipment shortages during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Reusable masks made from surgical sterilization wrap represent such an innovative approach with social media frequently referring to them as "N95 alternatives." This material was tested for particle filtration efficiency and breathability to clarify what role they might have in infection prevention and control. METHODS: A heavyweight, double layer sterilization wrap was tested when new and after 2, 4, 6, and 10 autoclave sterilizing cycles and compared with an approved N95 respirator and a surgical mask via testing procedures using a sodium chloride aerosol for N95 efficiency testing similar to 42 CFR 84.181. Pressure testing to indicate breathability was also conducted. RESULTS: The particle filtration efficiency for the sterilization wrap ranged between 58% to 66%, with similar performance when new and after sterilizing cycles. The N95 respirator and surgical mask performed at 95% and 68% respectively. Pressure drops for the sterilization wrap, N95 and surgical mask were 10.4 mmH2O, 5.9 mmH2O, and 5.1 mmH2O, respectively, well below the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health limits of 35 mmH2O during initial inhalation and 25 mmH2O during initial exhalation. CONCLUSIONS: The sterilization wrap's particle filtration efficiency is much lower than a N95 respirator, but falls within the range of a surgical mask, with acceptable breathability. Performance testing of non-traditional mask materials is crucial to determine potential protection efficacy and for correcting misinterpretation propagated through popular media.

Inactivation of Severe Acute Respiratory Coronavirus Virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and Diverse RNA and DNA Viruses on Three-Dimensionally Printed Surgical Mask Materials.

BACKGROUND: Personal protective equipment (PPE) is a critical need during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Alternative sources of surgical masks, including 3-dimensionally (3D) printed approaches that may be reused, are urgently needed to prevent PPE shortages. Few data exist identifying decontamination strategies to inactivate viral pathogens and retain 3D-printing material integrity. OBJECTIVE: To test viral disinfection methods on 3D-printing materials. METHODS: The viricidal activity of common disinfectants (10% bleach, quaternary ammonium sanitizer, 3% hydrogen peroxide, or 70% isopropanol and exposure to heat (50°C, and 70°C) were tested on four 3D-printed materials used in the healthcare setting, including a surgical mask design developed by the Veterans' Health Administration. Inactivation was assessed for several clinically relevant RNA and DNA pathogenic viruses, including severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1). RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 and all viruses tested were completely inactivated by a single application of bleach, ammonium quaternary compounds, or hydrogen peroxide. Similarly, exposure to dry heat (70°C) for 30 minutes completely inactivated all viruses tested. In contrast, 70% isopropanol reduced viral titers significantly less well following a single application. Inactivation did not interfere with material integrity of the 3D-printed materials. CONCLUSIONS: Several standard decontamination approaches effectively disinfected 3D-printed materials. These approaches were effective in the inactivation SARS-CoV-2, its surrogates, and other clinically relevant viral pathogens. The decontamination of 3D-printed surgical mask materials may be useful during crisis situations in which surgical mask supplies are limited.

The "double eights mask brace" improves the fit and protection of a basic surgical mask amidst COVID-19 pandemic.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in widespread shortages of personal protective equipment, including N95 respirators. Although basic surgical facemasks are more commonly available, their efficacy is limited due primarily to their poor face seal. This pilot study examined the impact of a rubber band mask brace on a basic surgical mask, as determined by quantitative fit testing. METHODS: Subjects wearing a basic surgical facemask and the rubber band mask brace underwent quantitative fit testing using machinery designed to certify N95 mask fit. Subjects were tested with the brace anchored behind their ears, with a paperclip behind the head, and on the side knobs of their face shields. The primary outcome measure was whether the subject passed the quantitative fit test at or above the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)-verified standard for N95 masks. RESULTS: Subjects (n = 11) were 54.5% female, with a median height of 70 inches (interquartile range [IQR] = 68-74), weight of 170 pounds (IQR = 145-215), and body mass index (BMI) of 24.6 (IQR = 22.2-27.2), and encompassing 5 distinct N95 mask fit types. We found that 45%, 100%, and 100% of subjects passed the quantitative fit test when the brace was anchored behind the ears, with a paperclip and on a face shield, respectively. CONCLUSION: Of the 11 subjects included in the analysis, across a range of body habitus and N95 mask fit types, all passed the quantitative fit test when the mask brace was anchored on either face shield or with a paperclip. This data suggests that although the brace does not create an N95 equivalent in terms of filtration, it would offer improved protection from airborne viruses when worn with a basic surgical mask.