Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5668/JEHS.2022.48.2.116

Filtration Efficiencies of Commercial Face Masks in Korea for Biological Aerosols  

Choi, Sueun (Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University)
Choi, Doseon (Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University)
Jang, Sung Jae (Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University)
Park, SungJun (Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University)
Yoon, Chungsik (Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University)
Lee, Kiyoung (Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University)
Ko, GwangPyo (Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University)
Lee, Cheonghoon (Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University)
Publication Information
Journal of Environmental Health Sciences / v.48, no.2, 2022 , pp. 116-122 More about this Journal
Abstract
Background: The recent COVID-19 pandemic is one of the worst disease outbreaks of the 21th century. Due to a lack of reliable antiviral therapeutics, wearing face masks is recommended to prevent airborne infection originating from virus-contaminated bioaerosols. Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the filtration efficiencies of face masks that are commercially available in South Korea for a biological aerosol of Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) and murine coronavirus, a well-known surrogate for human coronaviruses. Methods: We collected six different kinds of commercial masks: two Korea Filter (KF)94 (KF94-1, KF94-2) masks, one surgical (Surgical-1) mask, one anti-droplet (KF-AD-1) mask, and two dust (Dust-1, Dust-2) face masks. S. aureus (ATCC 6538), a well-performing test bacteria and murine coronavirus (ATCC VR-764) were prepared under a suitable culture condition. Then, a mask biological filtration tester was used to examine the microbial filtration efficiencies of masks. Test microorganisms were quantitatively measured via cultivation methods and microbial filtration efficiencies were calculated appropriately. Results: All face masks showed over 99.6% filtration efficiency for S. aureus or murine coronavirus. There were no significant differences among the bacterial filtration efficiencies of the face masks. KF94-1 (99.97±0.08%) and Dust-1 mask (99.97±0.07%) showed the highest (over 99.9%) filtration efficiency for murine coronavirus. KF94-1 or Dust-1 masks showed a significant virus filtration efficiency compared to Surgical-1 mask (p<0.05; Mann-Whitney U test). Conclusions: All the commercially available face masks used in this study can filter S. aureus or murine coronavirus in bioaerosols efficiently, regardless of the mask type. Therefore, our results suggest that wearing a certified face mask is a reliable means to prevent the transmission of infectious airborne diseases via biological aerosols.
Keywords
Biological aerosol; bacteria; coronavirus; face mask; filtration efficiency;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Statistics Korea. COVID-19 dashboard. Available: https://kosis.kr/covid_eng/covid_index.do [accessed 4 March 2022].
2 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Principles of epidemiology in public health practice: an introduction to applied epidemiology and biostatistics, 3rd ed. Atlanta (GA): U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2006.
3 Otter JA, Donskey C, Yezli S, Douthwaite S, Goldenberg SD, Weber DJ. Transmission of SARS and MERS coronaviruses and influenza virus in healthcare settings: the possible role of dry surface contamination. J Hosp Infect. 2016; 92(3): 235-250.   DOI
4 Cheng Y, Ma N, Witt C, Rapp S, Wild PS, Andreae MO, et al. Face masks effectively limit the probability of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Science. 2021; 372(6549): 1439-1443.   DOI
5 European Committee for Standardization (CEN). SIST EN14683:2019+AC:2019: Medical face masks - requirements and test methods. Brussels: CEN; 2019.
6 Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. Korean standard and test method for quasi-drugs. Cheongju: Ministry of Food and Drug Safety; 2021.
7 Jeong SB, Ko HS, Seo SC, Jung JH. Evaluation of filtration characteristics and microbial recovery rates of commercial filtering facepiece respirators against airborne bacterial particles. Sci Total Environ. 2019; 682: 729-736.   DOI
8 Tcharkhtchi A, Abbasnezhad N, Zarbini Seydani M, Zirak N, Farzaneh S, Shirinbayan M. An overview of filtration efficiency through the masks: mechanisms of the aerosols penetration. Bioact Mater. 2020; 6: 106-122.
9 Ministry of Employment and Labor. Public notice on safety certificate for protective equipment (notice no. 2020-35). Sejong: Ministry of Employment and Labor; 2020.
10 Jang JY, Kim SW. Evaluation of filtration performance efficiency of commercial cloth masks. J Environ Health Sci. 2015; 41(3): 203-215.   DOI
11 Kang S, Kim S, Yoon CS, Lee K. Evaluation of the filtration efficiency and facial inhalation resistance of various commercial masks. J Environ Health Sci. 2021; 47(3): 292-301.   DOI
12 Siller P, Reissner J, Hansen S, Kuhl M, Bartel A, Schmelzeisen D, et al. Innovative textiles used in face masks: filtration efficiency and self-disinfecting properties against coronaviruses. Nanomaterials (Basel). 2021; 11(8): 2088.   DOI
13 Zeng N, Li Z, Ng S, Chen D, Zhou H. Epidemiology reveals mask wearing by the public is crucial for COVID-19 control. Med Microecol. 2020; 4: 100015.   DOI
14 Filonets T, Solovchuk M, Gao W, Sheu TW. Investigation of the efficiency of mask wearing, contact tracing, and case isolation during the COVID-19 outbreak. J Clin Med. 2021; 10(13): 2761.   DOI
15 Whiley H, Keerthirathne TP, Nisar MA, White MAF, Ross KE. Viral filtration efficiency of fabric masks compared with surgical and N95 masks. Pathogens. 2020; 9(9): 762.   DOI
16 Raynor PC, Adesina A, Aboubakr HA, Yang M, Torremorell M, Goyal SM. Comparison of samplers collecting airborne influenza viruses: 1. Primarily impingers and cyclones. PLoS One. 2021; 16(1): e0244977.   DOI
17 Ma B, Gundy PM, Gerba CP, Sobsey MD, Linden KG. UV inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 across the UVC spectrum: KrCl* excimer, mercury-vapor, and light-emitting-diode (LED) sources. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2021; 87(22): e0153221.   DOI
18 String GM, White MR, Gute DM, Muhlberger E, Lantagne DS. Selection of a SARS-CoV-2 surrogate for use in surface disinfection efficacy studies with chlorine and antimicrobial surfaces. Environ Sci Technol Lett. 2021; 8(11): 995-1001.   DOI
19 Korner RW, Majjouti M, Alcazar MAA, Mahabir E. Of mice and men: the coronavirus MHV and mouse models as a translational approach to understand SARS-CoV-2. Viruses. 2020; 12(8): 880.   DOI
20 Central Disaster and Safety Countermeasure Headquarters. Basic guidelines for distancing in daily life. Available: http://ncov.mohw.go.kr/en/guidelineView.do?brdId=18&brdGubun=181&dataGubun=&ncvContSeq=2763&contSeq=2763&board_id=&gubun=# [accessed 4 March 2022].
21 Worldometer. Reported cases and deaths by COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic. Available: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ [accessed 4 March 2022].
22 ASTM International. Standard test method for evaluating the bacterial filtration efficiency (BFE) of medical face mask materials, using a biological aerosol of Staphylococcus aureus. West Conshohocken (PA): ASTM International; 2019.
23 Mathieu E, Ritchie H, Ortiz-Ospina E, Roser M, Hasell J, Appel C, et al. A global database of COVID-19 vaccinations. Nat Hum Behav. 2021; 5(7): 947-953. Erratum in: Nat Hum Behav. 2021; 5(7): 956-959.   DOI
24 Konda A, Prakash A, Moss GA, Schmoldt M, Grant GD, Guha S. Aerosol filtration efficiency of common fabrics used in respiratory cloth masks. ACS Nano. 2020; 14(5): 6339-6347. Erratum in: ACS Nano. 2020; 14(8): 10742-10743.   DOI
25 Ardon-Dryer K, Warzywoda J, Tekin R, Biros J, Almodovar S, Weeks BL, et al. Mask material filtration efficiency and mask fitting at the crossroads: implications during pandemic times. Aerosol Air Qual Res. 2021; 21(7): 200571.   DOI