A randomised controlled pilot study to compare filtration factor of a novel non-fit-tested high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtering facemask with a fit-tested N95 mask
Publication in refereed journal


Times Cited
Web of Science3WOS source URL (as at 17/10/2020) Click here for the latest count
Altmetrics Information
.

Other information
AbstractUse of a fit-tested N95 or FFP2 mask is recommended to protect against transmission of airborne pathogens. This poses considerable logistic problems when preparing for, or dealing with, an epidemic. Some of these problems might be overcome by use of a compact reusable high-efficiency particulate air filtering mask that can be cut to size. We carried out a randomised controlled cross-over study to compare the efficacy of such a mask (Totobobo, Dream Lab One Pte Ltd, Singapore) with fit-tested N95 masks (1860 or 1860s or 1862; 3M, St Paul, MN, USA) in 22 healthy volunteers. The median (interquartile range) reduction in airborne particle counts was significantly higher [193-fold (145-200)] for N95 masks than for Totobobo masks [135-fold (83-184)] (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the proportion of subjects achieving a reduction of >= 100-fold between N95 (19/22) and Totobobo (16/22) masks. We conclude that use of the Totobobo mask without fit testing cannot be recommended, but its performance is sufficiently promising to warrant further investigation. (C) 2010 The Hospital Infection Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
All Author(s) ListAu SSW, Gomersall CD, Leung P, Li PTY
Journal nameJournal of Hospital Infection
Year2010
Month9
Day1
Volume Number76
Issue Number1
PublisherWB Saunders
Pages23 - 25
ISSN0195-6701
eISSN1532-2939
LanguagesEnglish-United Kingdom
KeywordsDisease transmission; Infection control; Occupational health; Patient-to-professional; Respiratory protective devices
Web of Science Subject CategoriesInfectious Diseases; INFECTIOUS DISEASES

Last updated on 2020-17-10 at 23:52