Literature DB >> 34161193

Efficacy of universal masking for source control and personal protection from simulated cough and exhaled aerosols in a room.

William G Lindsley1, Donald H Beezhold1, Jayme Coyle1, Raymond C Derk1, Francoise M Blachere1, Theresa Boots1, Jeffrey S Reynolds1, Walter G McKinney1, Erik Sinsel1, John D Noti1.   

Abstract

Face masks reduce the expulsion of respiratory aerosols produced during coughs and exhalations ("source control"). Factors such as the directions in which people are facing (orientation) and separation distance also affect aerosol dispersion. However, it is not clear how the combined effects of masking, orientation, and distance affect the exposure of individuals to respiratory aerosols in indoor spaces. We placed a respiratory aerosol simulator ("source") and a breathing simulator ("recipient") in a 3 m x 3 m chamber and measured aerosol concentrations for different combinations of masking, orientation, and separation distance. When the simulators were front-to-front during coughing, masks reduced the 15-minute mean aerosol concentration at the recipient by 92% at 0.9 and 1.8 m separation. When the simulators were side-by-side, masks reduced the concentration by 81% at 0.9 m and 78% at 1.8 m. During breathing, masks reduced the aerosol concentration by 66% when front-to-front and 76% when side-by-side at 0.9 m. Similar results were seen at 1.8 m. When the simulators were unmasked, changing the orientations from front-to-front to side-by-side reduced the cough aerosol concentration by 59% at 0.9 m and 60% at 1.8 m. When both simulators were masked, changing the orientations did not significantly change the concentration at either distance during coughing or breathing. Increasing the distance between the simulators from 0.9 m to 1.8 m during coughing reduced the aerosol concentration by 25% when no masks were worn but had little effect when both simulators were masked. During breathing, when neither simulator was masked, increasing the separation reduced the concentration by 13%, which approached significance, while the change was not significant when both source and recipient were masked. Our results show that universal masking reduces exposure to respiratory aerosol particles regardless of the orientation and separation distance between the source and recipient.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Airborne transmission; face masks; infection control; infectious disease transmission

Year:  2021        PMID: 34161193     DOI: 10.1080/15459624.2021.1939879

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Occup Environ Hyg        ISSN: 1545-9624            Impact factor:   2.155


  8 in total

1.  A review of facilities management interventions to mitigate respiratory infections in existing buildings.

Authors:  Yan Zhang; Felix Kin Peng Hui; Colin Duffield; Ali Mohammed Saeed
Journal:  Build Environ       Date:  2022-06-28       Impact factor: 7.093

2.  Efficacy of Ventilation, HEPA Air Cleaners, Universal Masking, and Physical Distancing for Reducing Exposure to Simulated Exhaled Aerosols in a Meeting Room.

Authors:  Jayme P Coyle; Raymond C Derk; William G Lindsley; Francoise M Blachere; Theresa Boots; Angela R Lemons; Stephen B Martin; Kenneth R Mead; Steven A Fotta; Jeffrey S Reynolds; Walter G McKinney; Erik W Sinsel; Donald H Beezhold; John D Noti
Journal:  Viruses       Date:  2021-12-17       Impact factor: 5.048

3.  Face mask fit modifications that improve source control performance.

Authors:  Francoise M Blachere; Angela R Lemons; Jayme P Coyle; Raymond C Derk; William G Lindsley; Donald H Beezhold; Karen Woodfork; Matthew G Duling; Brenda Boutin; Theresa Boots; James R Harris; Tim Nurkiewicz; John D Noti
Journal:  Am J Infect Control       Date:  2021-12-16       Impact factor: 2.918

4.  Reduction of exposure to simulated respiratory aerosols using ventilation, physical distancing, and universal masking.

Authors:  Jayme P Coyle; Raymond C Derk; William G Lindsley; Theresa Boots; Francoise M Blachere; Jeffrey S Reynolds; Walter G McKinney; Erik W Sinsel; Angela R Lemons; Donald H Beezhold; John D Noti
Journal:  Indoor Air       Date:  2022-02       Impact factor: 6.554

5.  Effectiveness of face masks in blocking the transmission of SARS-CoV-2: A preliminary evaluation of masks used by SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals.

Authors:  Vinicius M Mello; Cristiane M Eller; Andreza L Salvio; Felipe F Nascimento; Camila M Figueiredo; Emanuelle S R F Silva; Paulo S F Sousa; Pamela F Costa; Anne A P Paiva; Maria A M M Mares-Guias; Elba R S Lemos; Marco A P Horta
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-02-23       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  The Effect of Mask Style and Fabric Selection on the Comfort Properties of Fabric Masks.

Authors:  Adine Gericke; Jiří Militký; Mohanapriya Venkataraman; Hester Steyn; Jana Vermaas
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 3.623

7.  Efficacy of Portable Air Cleaners and Masking for Reducing Indoor Exposure to Simulated Exhaled SARS-CoV-2 Aerosols - United States, 2021.

Authors:  William G Lindsley; Raymond C Derk; Jayme P Coyle; Stephen B Martin; Kenneth R Mead; Francoise M Blachere; Donald H Beezhold; John T Brooks; Theresa Boots; John D Noti
Journal:  MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep       Date:  2021-07-09       Impact factor: 17.586

8.  Unmasking the Mask: Investigating the Role of Physical Properties in the Efficacy of Fabric Masks to Prevent the Spread of the COVID-19 Virus.

Authors:  Adine Gericke; Mohanapriya Venkataraman; Jiri Militky; Hester Steyn; Jana Vermaas
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-15       Impact factor: 3.623

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.