Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Comparing the Fit of N95, KN95, Surgical, and Cloth Face Masks and Assessing the Accuracy of Fit Checking

View ORCID ProfileEugenia O’Kelly, View ORCID ProfileAnmol Arora, View ORCID ProfileSophia Pirog, View ORCID ProfileJames Ward, View ORCID ProfileP. John Clarkson
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.17.20176735
Eugenia O’Kelly
1Cambridge University, USA: 999 Green St, Apt 1505, San Francisco, CA USA 94133 E-mail:
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Eugenia O’Kelly
  • For correspondence: eo339@cam.ac.uk eo339@cam.ac.uk
Anmol Arora
2Cambridge University E-mail:
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Anmol Arora
  • For correspondence: aa957@cam.ac.uk
Sophia Pirog
3Northwestern University E-mail:
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Sophia Pirog
  • For correspondence: sophia.pirog@northwestern.edu
James Ward
4Cambridge University E-mail:
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for James Ward
  • For correspondence: jrw38@cam.ac.uk
P. John Clarkson
5Cambridge University E-mail:
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for P. John Clarkson
  • For correspondence: pjc10@cam.ac.uk
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has made well-fitting face masks a critical piece of protective equipment for healthcare workers and civilians. While the importance of wearing face masks has been acknowledged, there remains a lack of understanding about the role of good fit in rendering protective equipment useful. In addition, supply chain constraints have caused some organizations to abandon traditional quantitative or qualitative fit testing, and instead, have implemented subjective fit checking. Our study seeks to quantitatively evaluate the level of fit offered by various types of masks, and most importantly, assess the accuracy of implementing fit checks by comparing fit check results to quantitative fit testing results.

Methods Seven participants first evaluated N95 and KN95 masks by performing a fit check. Participants then underwent quantitative fit testing wearing five N95 masks, a KN95 mask, a surgical mask, and fabric masks.

Results N95 masks offered higher degrees of protection than the other categories of masks tested; however, it should be noted that most N95 masks failed to fit the participants adequately. Fit check responses had poor correlation with quantitative fit scores. All non-N95 masks achieved low fit scores.

Conclusion Fit is critical to the level of protection offered by masks. For an N95 mask to provide the promised protection, it must fit the participant. Performing a fit check was an unreliable way of determining fit.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

No external funding was received.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Ethical approval for this study was given by the Cambridge University, Department of Engineering Ethics Review Committee. Written consent was obtained from all participants.

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I 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).

Yes

I 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.

Yes

Data Availability

The data set relevant to this study is available in the Cambridge open access data repository. The DOI for this is: https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.56361

https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.56361

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted August 21, 2020.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Comparing the Fit of N95, KN95, Surgical, and Cloth Face Masks and Assessing the Accuracy of Fit Checking
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Comparing the Fit of N95, KN95, Surgical, and Cloth Face Masks and Assessing the Accuracy of Fit Checking
Eugenia O’Kelly, Anmol Arora, Sophia Pirog, James Ward, P. John Clarkson
medRxiv 2020.08.17.20176735; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.17.20176735
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Comparing the Fit of N95, KN95, Surgical, and Cloth Face Masks and Assessing the Accuracy of Fit Checking
Eugenia O’Kelly, Anmol Arora, Sophia Pirog, James Ward, P. John Clarkson
medRxiv 2020.08.17.20176735; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.17.20176735

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Public and Global Health
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (179)
  • Allergy and Immunology (431)
  • Anesthesia (99)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (943)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (178)
  • Dermatology (109)
  • Emergency Medicine (260)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (419)
  • Epidemiology (8971)
  • Forensic Medicine (4)
  • Gastroenterology (418)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (1938)
  • Geriatric Medicine (190)
  • Health Economics (400)
  • Health Informatics (1323)
  • Health Policy (657)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (517)
  • Hematology (212)
  • HIV/AIDS (416)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (10772)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (571)
  • Medical Education (200)
  • Medical Ethics (54)
  • Nephrology (221)
  • Neurology (1819)
  • Nursing (108)
  • Nutrition (271)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (351)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (469)
  • Oncology (992)
  • Ophthalmology (296)
  • Orthopedics (111)
  • Otolaryngology (182)
  • Pain Medicine (126)
  • Palliative Medicine (44)
  • Pathology (265)
  • Pediatrics (576)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (275)
  • Primary Care Research (234)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (1892)
  • Public and Global Health (4111)
  • Radiology and Imaging (674)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (364)
  • Respiratory Medicine (548)
  • Rheumatology (224)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (190)
  • Sports Medicine (177)
  • Surgery (207)
  • Toxicology (38)
  • Transplantation (109)
  • Urology (80)