BACKGROUND During the COVID-19 pandemic, face masks are used as source control devices to reduce the expulsion of respiratory aerosols from infected people. Modifications such as mask braces, earloop straps, knotting and tucking, and double masking have been proposed to improve mask fit. However, the data on source control are limited.METHODS The effectiveness of mask fit modifications was determined by conducting fit tests on human subjects and simulator manikins and by performing simulated coughs and exhalations using a source control measurement system.RESULTS Medical masks without modification blocked ≥56% of cough aerosols and ≥42% of exhaled aerosols. Modifying fit by crossing the earloops or placing a bracket under the mask did not increase performance, while using earloop toggles, an earloop strap, and knotting and tucking the mask increased performance. The most effective modifications for improving source control performance were double masking and using a mask brace. Placing a cloth mask over a medical mask blocked ≥85% of cough aerosols and ≥91% of exhaled aerosols. Placing a brace over a medical mask blocked ≥95% of cough aerosols and ≥99% of exhaled aerosols.CONCLUSION Fit modifications can greatly improve the performance of face masks as source control devices for respiratory aerosols.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementResearch was supported by the following sources: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes of Health R01 ES015022 (TRN) and WV-CTSI U54 GM104942-05.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:WVU Protocol #: 2009119037All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData is available from research personnel upon request.

Universal mask wearing is recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to help control the spread of COVID-19. Masks reduce the expulsion of respiratory aerosols (called source control) and offer some protection to the wearer. However, masks vary greatly in their designs and construction materials, and it is not clear which are most effective. Our study tested 15 reusable cloth masks (which included face masks, neck gaiters, and bandanas), two medical masks, and two N95 filtering facepiece respirators as source control devices for aerosols ≤ 7 µm produced during simulated coughing and exhalation. These measurements were compared with the mask filtration efficiencies, airflow resistances, and fit factors. The source control collection efficiencies for the cloth masks ranged from 17% to 71% for coughing and 35% to 66% for exhalation. The filtration efficiencies of the cloth masks ranged from 1.4% to 98%, while the fit factors were 1.3 to 7.4 on an elastomeric manikin headform and 1.0 to 4.0 on human test subjects. The correlation coefficients between the source control efficacies and the other performance metrics ranged from 0.31 to 0.66 and were significant in all but one case. However, none of the alternative metrics were strong predictors of the source control performance of cloth masks. Our results suggest that a better understanding of the relationships between source control performance and metrics like filtration efficiency, airflow resistance, and fit factor are needed to develop simple methods to estimate the effectiveness of masks as source control devices for respiratory aerosols.

SARS-CoV-2 spreads by infectious aerosols and droplets from the respiratory tract. Masks and respirators can reduce the transmission of infectious respiratory diseases by collecting these aerosols at the source. The ability of source control devices to block aerosols can be tested by expelling an aerosol through a headform using constant airflows, which are simpler, or cyclic airflows, which are more realistic but require more complex methods. Experiments with respirators found that using cyclic vs. constant flows affected the amount of aerosol inhaled, but similar comparisons have not been made for source control devices with exhaled aerosols. We measured the collection efficiencies for exhaled aerosols for two cloth masks, two medical masks with and without an elastic mask brace, a neck gaiter, and an N95 filtering facepiece respirator using 15 L/min and 85 L/min constant and cyclic flows and a headform with pliable skin. The collection efficiencies for the 15 L/min cyclic flow, 15 L/min constant flow, and 85 L/min constant flow were not significantly different in most cases. The apparent collection efficiencies for the 85 L/min cyclic flow were artificially increased by rebreathing and refiltration of the aerosol from the collection chamber. The collection efficiencies correlated well with the fit factors (rho > 0.95) but not the filtration efficiencies (rho < 0.54). Our results suggest that the aerosol collection efficiency measurements of source control devices are comparable when testing the devices using either constant or cyclic airflows and that the potential for aerosol rebreathing must be considered when conducting experiments.Copyright © This work was authored as part of the Contributor's official duties as an Employee of the United States Government and is therefore a work of the United States Government. In accordance with 17 USC. 105, no copyright protection is available for such works under US Law.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, face masks are used as source control devices to reduce the expulsion of respiratory aerosols from infected people. Modifications such as mask braces, earloop straps, knotting and tucking, and double masking have been proposed to improve mask fit however the data on source control are limited. METHODS: The effectiveness of mask fit modifications was determined by conducting fit tests on human subjects and simulator manikins and by performing simulated coughs and exhalations using a source control measurement system. RESULTS: Medical masks without modification blocked ≥56% of cough aerosols and ≥42% of exhaled aerosols. Modifying fit by crossing the earloops or placing a bracket under the mask did not increase performance, while using earloop toggles, an earloop strap, and knotting and tucking the mask increased performance. The most effective modifications for improving source control performance were double masking and using a mask brace. Placing a cloth mask over a medical mask blocked ≥85% of cough aerosols and ≥91% of exhaled aerosols. Placing a brace over a medical mask blocked ≥95% of cough aerosols and ≥99% of exhaled aerosols. CONCLUSIONS: Fit modifications can greatly improve the performance of face masks as source control devices for respiratory aerosols.

Universal mask wearing is recommended to help control the spread of COVID-19. Masks reduce the expulsion of aerosols of respiratory fluids into the environment (called source control) and offer some protection to the wearer. Masks are often characterized using filtration efficiency, airflow resistance, and manikin or human fit factors, which are standard metrics used for personal protective devices. However, none of these metrics are direct measurements of how effectively a mask blocks coughed and exhaled aerosols. We studied the source control performance of 15 cloth masks (face masks, neck gaiters, and bandanas), two medical masks, and two N95 filtering facepiece respirators by measuring their ability to block aerosols ≤7 µm expelled during simulated coughing and exhalation (called source control collection efficiency). These measurements were compared with filtration efficiencies, airflow resistances, and fit factors measured on manikin headforms and humans. Collection efficiencies for the cloth masks ranged from 17% to 71% for coughing and 35% to 66% for exhalation. Filtration efficiencies for the cloth masks ranged from 1.4% to 98%, while the fit factors were 1.3 to 7.4 on headforms and 1.0 to 4.0 on human subjects. The Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients between the source control collection efficiencies and the standard metrics ranged from 0.03 to 0.68 and were significant in all but two cases. However, none of the standard metrics were strongly correlated with source control performance. A better understanding of the relationships between source control collection efficiency, filtration efficiency, airflow resistance, and fit factor is needed. ©, This work was authored as part of the Contributor's official duties as an Employee of the United States Government and is therefore a work of the United States Government. In accordance with 17 USC. 105, no copyright protection is available for such works under US Law.

Recently, total inward leakage (TIL) for filtering facepiece and elastomeric half-mask respirators (EHRs) was measured according to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) test method standard 16900-1:2014 that showed larger TIL for corn oil aerosol than for NaCl aerosol. Comparison of TIL measured for different aerosols for higher protection level respirators is lacking. The objective of this study was to determine TIL for EHRs, full-facepiece respirators, and loose-fitting and tight-fitting powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) using NaCl and corn oil aerosols to compare. TIL was measured for two models each of EHRs, full-facepiece respirators, and loose-fitting and tight-fitting PAPRs. After fit testing with a PortaCount (TSI, St. Paul, MN) using the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) protocol, eight subjects were tested in the NaCl aerosol chamber first and then in the corn oil aerosol chamber, while another eight subjects tested in the reverse order. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of the two groups. TIL was measured as a ratio of mass-based aerosol concentrations inside the mask to the test chamber while the subjects performed ISO 16900-1-defined exercises using continuous sampling methods. The concentration of corn oil aerosol was measured with one light scattering photometer, alternately, and NaCl aerosol was measured using two flame photometers. Results showed the geometric mean TIL for EHR was significantly (p < 0.05) larger for corn oil aerosol than for NaCl aerosol. EHR models equipped with P100 filters showed relatively smaller TIL values than the same models with N95 filters showing that TIL was inversely related to filter efficiency. Interestingly, TIL was significantly (p < 0.05) larger for NaCl aerosol than for corn oil aerosol for PAPRs, but not for full-facepiece respirators. TIL was inversely related to fit factors of respirator types. Overall, filter efficiency and faceseal leakage determine TIL. The relative trends in TIL for the two aerosols' test methods differ between respirator types indicating that generalization of TIL for respirator types may not be appropriate when using different test agents.

An ASTM International subcommittee on Respiratory Protection, F23.65 is currently developing a consensus standard for assessing respirator fit capability (RFC) criteria of half-facepiece air-purifying particulate respirators. The objective of this study was to evaluate if the test methods being developed for half-facepiece respirators can reasonably be applied to nonpowered full-facepiece-air-purifying respirators (FF-APR). Benchmark RFC test data were collected for three families of FF-APRs (a one-size-only family, a two-size family, and a three-size family). All respirators were equipped with P100 class particulate filters. Respirators were outfitted with a sampling probe to collect an in-mask particle concentration sample in the breathing zone of the wearer. Each of the six respirator facepieces was tested on the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 25-subject Bivariate Panel. The RFC test assessed face seal leakage using a PortaCount fit test. Subjects followed the corresponding Occupational Safety and Health Administration-accepted fit test protocol. Two donnings per subject/respirator model combination were performed. The panel passing rate (PPR) (number or percentage of subjects in the panel achieving acceptable fit on at least one of two donnings) was determined for each respirator family at specified fit factor passing levels of 500, 1,000, and 2,000. As a reasonable expectation based on a previous analysis of alpha and beta fit test errors for various panel sizes, the selected PPR benchmark for our study was >75%. At the fit factor passing level of 500 obtained on at least one of two donnings, the PPRs for three-, two-, and one-size families were 100, 79, and 88%, respectively. As the fit factor passing criterion increased from 500 to 1,000 or 2,000, PPRs followed a decreasing trend. Each of the three tested families of FF-APRs are capable of fitting >/=75% of the intended user population at the 500 fit factor passing level obtained on at least one of two donnings. The methods presented here can be used as a reference for standards development organizations considering developing RFC test requirements.

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standard 16900-1:2014 specifies the use of sodium chloride (NaCl) and corn oil aerosols, and sulfur hexafluoride gas for measuring total inward leakage (TIL). However, a comparison of TIL between different agents is lacking. The objective of this study was to measure and compare TIL for respirators using corn oil and NaCl aerosols. TIL was measured with 10 subjects donning two models of filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) including FFP1, N95, P100, and elastomeric half-mask respirators (ERs) in NaCl and corn oil aerosol test chambers, using continuous sampling methods. After fit testing with a PortaCount (TSI, St. Paul, MN) using the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) protocol, five subjects were tested in the NaCl chamber first and then in the corn oil chamber, while other subjects tested in the reverse order. TIL was measured as a ratio of mass-based aerosol concentrations in-mask to the test chamber, while the subjects performed ISO 16900-1-defined exercises. The concentration of NaCl aerosol was measured using two flame photometers, and corn oil aerosol was measured with one light scattering photometer. The same instruments were used to measure filter penetration in both chambers using a Plexiglas(R) setup. The size distribution of aerosols was determined using a scanning mobility particle sizer and charge was measured with an electrometer. Filter efficiency was measured using an 8130 Automated Filter Tester (TSI). Results showed the geometric mean TIL for corn oil aerosol for one model each of all respirator categories, except P100, were significantly (p<0.05) greater than for NaCl aerosol. Filter penetration in the two test chambers showed a trend similar to TIL. The count median diameter was approximately 82 nm for NaCl and approximately 200 nm for corn oil aerosols. The net positive charge for NaCl aerosol was relatively larger. Both fit factor and filter efficiency influence TIL measurement. Overall, TIL determination with aerosols of different size distributions and charges using different methodologies may produce dissimilar results.