PLoS ONE (Jan 2021)

Effects of distancing and pattern of breathing on the filtering capability of commercial and custom-made facial masks: An in-vitro study.

  • Lorenzo Ball,
  • Stefano Alberti,
  • Claudio Belfortini,
  • Chiara Almondo,
  • Chiara Robba,
  • Denise Battaglini,
  • Carlo Cravero,
  • Paolo Pelosi,
  • Valentina Caratto,
  • Maurizio Ferretti

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250432
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 16, no. 4
p. e0250432

Abstract

Read online

BackgroundSince the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemics, masking policies have been advocated. While masks are known to prevent transmission towards other individuals, it is unclear if different types of facial masks can protect the user from inhalation. The present study compares in-vitro different commercial and custom-made facial masks at different distances and breathing patterns.MethodsMasks were placed on a head mannequin connected to a lung simulator, using a collecting filter placed after the mannequin airway. Certified, commercial and custom-made masks were tested at three different distances between the emitter and the mannequin: 40 cm, 80 cm and 120 cm. Two patterns of breathing were used, simulating normal and polypneic respiration. A solution of methylene blue was nebulized with a jet nebulizer and different mask-distance-breathing pattern combinations were tested. The primary endpoint was the inhaled fraction, defined as the amount of methylene blue detected with spectrophotometry expressed as percent of the amount detected in a reference condition of zero distance and no mask.FindingsWe observed a significant effect of distance (p DiscussionDistance, type of device and breathing pattern resulted in highly variable inhaled fraction. While the use of all types of masks resulted relevantly less inhalation compared to distancing alone, only high-grade certified devices (FFP3 and the combination of FFP2 + surgical mask) ensured negligible inhaled fraction in all conditions.