Face Off: 3D-Printed Masks as a Cost-Effective and Reusable Alternative to N95 Respirators: A Feasibility Study

Levine, Marc S.; Levine, Lance; Xun, Helen; Mathew, Paul; Singh, Devinder P.; Gerber, Adam; Antonietti, Michael

doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2022.04.026

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the study by Martelly et al, the significant level was not reported; however, due to the considerable difference between the two studied respirators, it could be considered as a statistically significant difference in terms of FF (7.0 vs. 143) [ 129 ]. Whereas, no significant differences were determined between the studied masks or respirators in the six studies [ 32 , 48 , 51 , 63 , 131 , 132 ]. Due to fit test principle called “OSFA” which stands for there is no one size fits all, fit test results would be unpredictable and each subject could fit with a specific brand, model, style, and size.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A systematic review of passing fit testing of the masks and respirators used during the COVID-19 pandemic: Part 1-quantitative fit test procedures

Fakherpour,

Jahangiri,

Jansz

2023

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background During respiratory infection pandemics, masks and respirators are highly sought after, especially for frontline healthcare workers and patients carrying respiratory viruses. The objective of this study was to systematically review fit test pass rates and identify factors influencing the fitting characteristics. Methods Potentially relevant studies were identified using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Science Direct during the COVID-19 pandemic from February 5, 2020, to March 21, 2023. The search strategy using the following keywords was conducted: Quantitative Fit Test, Condensation Nuclei Counter, Controlled Negative Pressure, PortaCount, Sibata, Accufit, Fit, Seal, Mask, Respirator, Respiratory Protective Device, Respiratory Protective Equipment, Protective Device, Personal Protective Equipment, COVID-19, Coronavirus, and SARS-CoV-2. The quality of the included studies was also assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results A total of 137 articles met the eligibility criteria. Fifty articles had a quality score of less than 7 (good quality). A total of 21 studies had a fit test pass rate of less than 50%. 26 studies on disposable respirators and 11 studies on reusable respirators had an FF of less than 50 and less than 200, respectively. The most influential factors include respirator brand/model, style, gender, ethnicity, facial dimensions, facial hair, age, reuse, extensive movement, seal check, comfort and usability assessment, and training. Conclusion 37.36% of the disposable respirator studies and 43% of the reusable respirator studies did not report fit test results. 67.86% of the disposable respirator studies had a fit test pass rate greater than 50%, and 35.84% of these studies had an FF greater than 100. Also, 85.71% of the reusable respirator studies had a fit test pass rate greater than 50%, and 52.77% of these studies had an FF greater than 1000. Overall, the fit test pass rate was relatively acceptable. Newly developed or modified respirators must undergo reliable testing to ensure the protection of HCWs. Subject and respirator characteristics should be considered when implementing fit testing protocols. An optimal fit test panel should be developed prior to respirator design, certification, procurement decisions, and selection procedures.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fifteen studies were performed regarding the reusable respirators compared to the FFRs [ 48 , 51 , 53 , 58 , 61 , 63 , 67 , 69 , 93 , 94 , 99 , 112 , 127 , 137 , 142 ]. All those studies reported that reusable respirators achieved a higher passing fit test rate than those of FFRs.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of passing fit testing of the masks and respirators used during the COVID-19 pandemic: Part 1-quantitative fit test procedures

Fakherpour,

Jahangiri,

Jansz

2023

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In recently published research in the The American Journal of Medicine , we established via fit testing trials employing a particle counter that these masks offered a superior fit factor to even N95s and were better suited to a diversity of face shapes and sizes. 7 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A More Fitting Approach to Mask Policy

Levine

2022

The American Journal of Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In recent years, the 3D printing of PLA has attracted attention as an affordable and attainable method of manufacturing face masks. [124][125][126] PLA is available in a wide range of colours to customise the masks. For instance, He and co-workers fabricated transparent, biodegradable PLA air lters by electrospinning PLA bers on aluminium foil, followed by PLA 3D printing over the electrospun layer.…”

Section: Naturally Derived Biodegradable Polymersmentioning

confidence: 99%