logo
CONTENT TYPES

Can N95 Respirators Be Reused after Disinfection? How Many Times?

  • Lei Liao
    Lei Liao
    4C Air, Inc., Sunnyvale, California 94089, United States
    More by Lei Liao
  • Wang Xiao
    Wang Xiao
    4C Air, Inc., Sunnyvale, California 94089, United States
    More by Wang Xiao
  • Mervin Zhao
    Mervin Zhao
    4C Air, Inc., Sunnyvale, California 94089, United States
    More by Mervin Zhao
  • Xuanze Yu
    Xuanze Yu
    4C Air, Inc., Sunnyvale, California 94089, United States
    More by Xuanze Yu
  • Haotian Wang
    Haotian Wang
    4C Air, Inc., Sunnyvale, California 94089, United States
    More by Haotian Wang
  • Qiqi Wang
    Qiqi Wang
    4C Air, Inc., Sunnyvale, California 94089, United States
    More by Qiqi Wang
  • Steven Chu
    Steven Chu
    Department of Physics, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United States
    Department of Molecular and Cellular Physiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United States
    More by Steven Chu
  • , and 
  • Yi Cui*
    Yi Cui
    Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United States
    Stanford Institute for Materials and Energy Sciences, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Menlo Park, California 94025, United States
    *Email: [email protected]
    More by Yi Cui
Cite this: ACS Nano 2020, 14, 5, 6348–6356
Publication Date (Web):May 5, 2020
https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.0c03597
Copyright © 2020 American Chemical Society
Article Views
39790
Altmetric
-
Citations
LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICS
PDF (5 MB)
Supporting Info (1)»

Abstract

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a major shortage of N95 respirators, which are essential for protecting healthcare professionals and the general public who may come into contact with the virus. Thus, it is essential to determine how we can reuse respirators and other personal protective equipment in these urgent times. We investigated multiple commonly used disinfection schemes on media with particle filtration efficiency of 95%. Heating was recently found to inactivate the virus in solution within 5 min at 70 °C and is among the most scalable, user-friendly methods for viral disinfection. We found that heat (≤85 °C) under various humidities (≤100% relative humidity, RH) was the most promising, nondestructive method for the preservation of filtration properties in meltblown fabrics as well as N95-grade respirators. At 85 °C, 30% RH, we were able to perform 50 cycles of heat treatment without significant changes in the filtration efficiency. At low humidity or dry conditions, temperatures up to 100 °C were not found to alter the filtration efficiency significantly within 20 cycles of treatment. Ultraviolet (UV) irradiation was a secondary choice, which was able to withstand 10 cycles of treatment and showed small degradation by 20 cycles. However, UV can potentially impact the material strength and subsequent sealing of respirators. Finally, treatments involving liquids and vapors require caution, as steam, alcohol, and household bleach all may lead to degradation of the filtration efficiency, leaving the user vulnerable to the viral aerosols.

  Note

This article is made available via the ACS COVID-19 subset for unrestricted RESEARCH re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an ongoing pandemic with over three million confirmed cases and new cases increasing by ∼10% per day (at the time of writing)(1) that has caused major disruptions to nearly all facets of everyday life around the world. The disease is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which was first detected in Wuhan, China.(2,3) The virus is likely of zoonotic origin and, like the SARS-CoV, enters human cells via the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). ACE2 is a membrane protein that is responsible for regulating vasoconstriction and blood pressure and serves as an entry point for coronaviruses found in the lungs, heart, kidneys, and intestines. SARS-CoV-2 utilizes ACE2 more efficiently than does SARS-CoV, which may explain why the human-to-human transmissibility of COVID-19 is so high.(4)
Once infected, the patient exhibits flu-like symptoms such as fever, chest tightness, dry cough, and, in some cases, severe pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) develops.(5−8) Because the incubation period is ca. 3–4 days but can be as long as 20 days, along with the presence of asymptomatic carriers, the virus has been extremely difficult to contain.(9) Although the initial mortality rate was estimated to be ca. 3.5% in China, compounding the longer incubation period and testing delays has led to new global estimates of ca. 5.7%.(10)
Although the precise mode SARS-CoV-2’s viral transmission is not known, a primary transmission mode in viruses such as SARS and influenza is through short-range aerosols and droplets.(11) When a person infected with a virus breathes, speaks, sings, coughs, or sneezes, micron-sized aerosols containing the virus are released into the air. Data gathered from influenza patients suggest that these aerosols are typically fine (<5 μm) or coarse (>5 μm).(11−13) Coarse particles can settle due to gravity within 1 h. Fine particles, however, especially those smaller than 1 μm, can essentially stay in the air nearly indefinitely. Droplets, or particles >10 μm, settle rapidly and are not typically deposited in the respiratory tract through means of aerosol inhalation. Particles larger than 5 μm typically only reach the upper respiratory tract, whereas fine particles <5 μm are critically able to reach the lower respiratory tract, similar to harmful particulate matter pollution (Figure 1). Although coughing and sneezing provide many aerosols, the size distribution and number of particles emitted during normal speech serve as a significant viral transmitter.(12) Singing has been found to be comparable to continuous coughing in the transmission of airborne pathogens,(14) which was demonstrated during a choir practice on March 10, 2020 in Washington state. Although the choir members did not touch each other or share music during the rehearsal, 45 out of the 60 members of the Skagit Valley Choir were diagnosed with the virus 3 weeks later, and two had died.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 through viral aerosols. Image of SARS-CoV-2 courtesy of the CDC.

For dangerous airborne particulates, including viral aerosols during the current COVID-19 pandemic, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends the usage of N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFR) as personal protective equipment for healthcare professionals.(15−17) The N95 grade is determined by the CDC’s National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (document 42 CFR Part 84), which designates a minimum filtration efficiency of 95% for 0.3 μm (aerodynamic mass mean diameter) of sodium chloride aerosols. In addition to N95, there are N99 and N100 standards, which correspond to filtration efficiencies of 99% and 99.97%, respectively. For oil-based aerosols (DOP), NIOSH also has created grades R and P (with filtration efficiencies 95–99.97%). Elsewhere around the globe, the equivalent filtration grades to N95 are FFP2 (European Union), KN95 (China), DS/DL2 (Japan), and KF94 (South Korea). Although the actual SARS-CoV-2 virus is ca. 150 nm,(18) commonly found N95 respirators can offer protection against particles as small as 80 nm with 95% filtration efficiency (initial testing, not loaded).(19) With the actual viral aerosols in the ∼1 μm range, the N95 FFRs’ filtration efficiency should be sufficient for personal protection.
The N95 FFR is composed of multiple layers of, typically, polypropylene nonwoven fabrics (Figure 2A).(20) Among these layers, the most critical is that which is produced by the meltblown process. In typical FFRs, the meltblown layer is 100–1000 μm in thickness and composed of polypropylene microfibers with diameters in the range of ∼1–10 μm, as seen in the scanning electron microscope (SEM) images in Figure 2B,C. Due to the production method, meltblown fibers produce a lofty nonwoven material where the fibers can stack and create a three-dimensional network that has a porosity of 90%,(21) leading to high air permeability.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Meltblown fabrics in N95 FFRs. (A) Peeling apart a representative N95 FFR reveals multiple layers of nonwoven materials. (B) Scanning electron microscope (SEM) cross-section image reveals the middle meltblown layer has thinner fibers with thickness around 300 μm. (C) SEM image of meltblown fibers reveals a complicated randomly oriented network of fibers, with diameters in the range of ∼1–10 μm. (D) Schematic illustration of meltblown fibers (left) without and (right) with electret charging. In the left figure, smaller particles are able to pass through to the user, but particles are electrostatically captured in the case of an electret (right).

However, given that the fiber diameters are relatively small and the filters’ void space is large, the filtration efficiencies of meltblown fabrics by themselves should not be adequate for fine particle filtration (Figure 2D). To improve the filtration efficiency while keeping the same high air permeability, these fibers are charged through corona discharge and/or triboelectric means into quasi-permanent dipoles called electrets.(22,23) Once they are charged, the filter can significantly increase its filtration efficiency without adding any mass or density to the structure. In addition, whereas other filter media may decrease in efficiency when loading the filter with more aerosol (NaCl, DOP), the meltblown electrets are able to keep a relatively consistent efficiency throughout the test.(24)
The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a significant shortage of N95 FFRs,(25) especially among healthcare providers. Although the virus will eventually become inactive on the mask surface and it is unlikely to penetrate fully to the user’s intake side, a recent study shows that 72 h were required for the concentration of SARS-CoV-1 and SARS-CoV-2 viruses on plastic surfaces (40% RH and 21–23 °C) to be reduced by 3 orders of magnitude (from 103.7 to 100.6 TCID50 per mL of medium).(26) Assuming a similar longevity on FFR surfaces, it is important to develop procedures for the safe and frequent reuse of FFRs without reducing the filtration efficiency. The CDC has recommended many disinfection or sterilization methods, typically involving chemical, radiative, or temperature treatments.(27) In brief, the mechanisms of disinfection or sterilization of bacteria and viruses include protein denaturation (alcohols, heat), DNA/RNA disruption (UV, peroxides, oxidizers), and cellular disruption (phenolics, chlorides, aldehydes). Although none of these methods have been extensively evaluated for SARS-CoV-2 inactivation specifically, we tested methods that can be easily deployed within a hospital setting, and possibly accessible for the general population, with relatively high throughput for FFR reuse.

Results

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Among the CDC forms of disinfection, we chose five commonly used and potentially scalable, user-friendly methods: (1) heat under various humidities (heat denaturation inactivates SARS-CoV with temperatures >65 °C in solution, and possibly SARS-CoV-2 with temperatures >70 °C for 5 min);(28−30) (2) steam (100 °C heat-based denature); (3) 75% alcohol (denaturing of the virus, based on the CDC); (4) household diluted chlorine-based solution (oxidative or chemical damage, based on the CDC); and (5) ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI was able to inactivate the SARS-CoV in solution with UV–C light at a fluence of ∼3.6 J/cm2).(28) An oven, a UV–C sterilizer cabinet (found in barbershops or salons), steam, or liquid sprays can all realistically be deployed in the modern hospital setting and potentially in homes if needed. We did not consider some other common but more inaccessible techniques (equipment such as electron beam irradiation or plasma generators can be expensive or dangerous) or techniques known to cause damage to the FFR.(31)
Due to the shortage of FFRs, data collected were tested on a meltblown fabric (20 g/m2) with initial efficiency ≥95% (full details are listed in the Methods), unless otherwise specified. These samples are representative of how the filtration efficiency in a N95 FFR may change given exposure to these treatments in the worst-case scenario (i.e., no protective layer of the FFR). All meltblown samples were characterized using an industry standard Automated Filter Tester 8130A (TSI, Inc.) with a flow rate of 32 L/min and NaCl aerosol (0.26 μm mass median diameter). We subjected the meltblown samples to the aforementioned five disinfection methods and summarized the data in Table 1.
Table 1. One-Time Disinfection Treatment on a Meltblown Fabrica
treatmentmode of applicationtreatment time (min)filtration efficiency (%)pressure drop (Pa)
initial samples  96.52 ± 1.378.7 ± 1.0
dry heat (75 °C)static-air oven3096.67 ± 0.656.0 ± 1.0
steambeaker of boiling water1095.16 ± 0.739.0 ± 1.0
ethanol (75%)immersion and air dryuntil dry56.33 ± 3.037.7 ± 0.6
chlorine-based (2%)light spray and air dry573.11 ± 7.329.0 ± 1.0
UVGI (254 nm, 8 W)sterilization cabinet3095.50 ± 1.597.0 ± 0.0
a

The data from the initial samples displayed here are used throughout the remainder of the text and represent the mean and standard deviation from 30 samples. For all other data here, three samples were used for each initial treatment.

From the first disinfection, we can clearly note that the solution-based methods (ethanol and chlorine-based solution) drastically degraded the filtration efficiency to unacceptable levels, while the pressure drop remained comparable. As the pressure drop remained constant, this indicated that the loftiness and structure of the meltblown were unchanged, and the resultant efficiency degradation is the result of less apparent static charge on the electret (Figure S1). It is hypothesized in the literature that small molecules such as solvents can adsorb onto the fabrics’ fibers and either screen or possibly lift the frozen charges of the electret,(32) which would decrease the filtration efficiency. In the case of disinfection with ethanol-based solutions, recent preliminary work also shows that vacuum drying may be able to restore the efficiency of FFRs.(33) It is also possible that the chlorine-based solution may degrade the efficiency less than the alcohol-based solution due to the higher water content. As polypropylene is hydrophobic, the chlorine-based solution may have a more difficult time penetrating the fabric and the static charge of fibers deeper within the meltblown may be less affected.
These initial results are mostly in agreement with a NIOSH-published report regarding the decontamination of whole FFRs,(34) though it placed more focus on gas-based methods, which could be suitable to well-controlled industrial-scale disinfection. However, this may not be practical for on-site disinfection within the current hospital and clinic infrastructure. The report found that bleach (immersion in a diluted solution) resulted in less of a drop in efficiency than our results indicated, but the authors noted that there were strong odors from off-gassing, which is another reason to exclude this as a method to consider for the end-user.
We chose to focus on the three remaining treatment methods to perform multiple treatment cycles. The meltblown fabrics after 10 cycles of each treatment are summarized in Figure 3 (data provided in Table S1). After three treatments of these three methods, the meltblown fabric still has characteristics similar to the initial sample. However, after five steam treatments, the efficiency has a sharp drop which continues at cycle 10 (Table S2). Similar to the alcohol- and chlorine-solution treatments, the pressure drop can be maintained at ∼8–9 Pa, but the efficiency degrades to around ∼80%, which would be concerning in an environment with high viral aerosol concentrations. As with the solution treatments, the pressure drops remained similar, which suggests it is also due to the decay of static charge. The dwelling time and frequency may be critical for how well the static charge can be preserved. If steam treatments saturate the fibers many times and condense water droplets on the fibers, it is possible that the static charge decays after multiple treatments. Because this decay is due to the direct water molecule contact with the fibers, it may be possible to alleviate the static decay if the fibers do not come into contact with the vapor directly (sealed container, apparatus, bag, etc.) and steam only serves as the heating element.

Figure 3

Figure 3. The 10 treatment cycle evolution of filtration characteristics. (A) Efficiency evolution where it is clear that steam treatment results in a degradation of efficiency. (B) Pressure drop evolution where it is not apparent that any structure or morphology change has occurred in the meltblown fabrics.

Given that steam also resulted in eventual efficiency degradation, we further determined the limits of temperature and humidity. We performed multiple humidity experiments (30%, 70%, and 100% RH) at 85 °C (20 min/cycle) and observed no appreciable degradation of efficiency at any humidity level (Figure 4A,B). At 85 °C, 30% RH, we observed no efficiency degradation over 50 cycles on a meltblown fabric (Figure 4C,D). Using less harsh conditions (75 °C, dry heat), the results are expectedly in agreement (Figure S2). These results are further confirmed when testing multiple N95-level FFRs from various countries (listed in Methods) at 85 °C, 30% and 100% RH for 20 cycles (Figure 4E,F). Testing conditions for the FFRs were under a flow rate of 85 L/min. From all the FFRs, we observed little change in the filtration properties, as all FFRs with filtration efficiency >95% were able to retain filtration efficiencies >95% after 20 cycles of heat treatment, even in a humid environment.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Temperature and humidity evolution of meltblown and FFR filtration characteristics. (A, B) Evolution of meltblown fabrics’ filtration characteristics at 85 °C under different humidities, efficiency (A) and pressure drop (B). (C, D) Evolution of filtration characteristics on a meltblown fabric under 85 °C, 30% RH, efficiency (C) and pressure drop (D). (E, F) Evolution of the filtration characteristics on an N95-level FFRs with 85 °C, under 30% and 100% RH (measured at a flow rate of 85 L/min), efficiency (E) and pressure drop (F). The left-to-right of all FFR brands is as follows: (1) initial (leftmost, solid pattern, tested in ambient conditions), (2) 85 °C, 30% RH 10 cycles, (3) 85 °C, 30% RH 20 cycles, (4) 85 °C, 100% RH 10 cycles, and (5) 85 °C, 100% RH 20 cycles. (G, H) Temperature dependence of meltblown fabrics’ filtration characteristics over 20 cycles with RH < 30%, efficiency (G) and pressure drop (H).

To determine the upper limit of applicable temperature, we tested low humidity conditions (≤30% RH) up to 125 °C (10 min/cycle), plotted in Figure 4G,H (data provided in Table S3), as higher temperatures should lead to a shorter minimum treatment time and an increase in the method turnover speed. There is little to no change in the filtration efficiency and pressure drop up to 100 °C in low-moisture conditions. However, at 125 °C, there is a sharp drop in the filtration efficiency while maintaining a constant pressure drop at around cycle 5. Similarly, the lack of pressure drop change indicates that the degradation is also due to the static decay. Considering the higher temperature, polypropylene’s melting point (130–170 °C), as well as the thin and fibrous nature of the media, it is possible that the higher temperature is enough to relax the microscopic charge state within the polymer, resulting in some of the quasi-stable polarization to become depolarized to their neutral state. From SEM images, we did not identify any morphological changes and did not observe any apparent physical deformations (Figure S3), which may support this conclusion. This effect is not as strong as direct solvent contact, which reduced the filtration efficiency to <80%, whereas 125 °C reduced the efficiency to ∼90%. The mechanism of efficiency degradation may differ, as the solvent may form molecular adsorption layers or possibly liberate charge traps, but higher temperatures provide energy to return some of the fibers’ polarized state to a relaxed state.
Heat was a promising scalable method that may be suitable for FFR reuse. We can conclude that the highest subjectable temperature to the FFR for repeated use with ≥95% efficiency is <100 °C. At temperatures of ≤85 °C, humidity does not seem to play a crucial role in the filtration properties, as FFRs tested at a near 100% RH at 85 °C were unaffected. However, as steam results in a decrease in efficiency, the humidity should be kept low if approaching 100 °C. The temperature range here may pose some limitations in the available equipment, but we believe the current hospital infrastructure, and possibly the general population, should be able to perform these treatments. This includes using dryers, ovens, circulators, or even hot air guns, all of which are relatively scalable and user-friendly. Although the most common method to inactivate SARS-CoV-2 in solution is 56 °C for 30 min in a laboratory setting,(35) repeated treatments at temperatures below 65 °C (30 min) is not advised, as it was the reported temperature required to inactivate SARS-CoV in solution and limit it to undetectable traces.(29) Because these prior inactivation tests occurred in solution, further study on the heat inactivation of aerosolized viruses is required.
It is important to note that the real-world use of FFRs may lead to contamination of the nonwoven layers with sweat and/or oral droplets (dirt, salts, or other chemicals/particles), which may negatively impact the efficiency (adsorption, charge degradation, or even physical damage after prolonged periods). If these contaminants impact the electrostatic ability of the respirator, the heat treatment would not be able to restore this charge and would, at best, keep the efficiency as is. Further work may be needed to test the degradation of efficiency after use and if such heating procedures on used FFRs are changed by the introduction of these usage-incurred contaminants.
Finally, we tested the effect of UVGI on meltblown samples up to 20 cycles (Figure 5). The UVGI sterilization cabinet here provides UV–C light centered at a wavelength of 254 nm with an intensity of 8 W. The UV–C light areal intensity distribution is not uniform inside the cabinet, and its exact value needs to be measured in the future for dose determination, as the necessary radiation to inactivate SARS-CoV was previously found to be above ∼3.6 J/cm2.(28) At 10 cycles, the data are in agreement with the NIOSH report,(34) but efficiency eventually decays to 93% at 20 cycles, making it unsuitable for N95-grade FFRs by itself.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Effect of UVGI on meltblown filtration characteristics. (A) Efficiency of meltblown fabric that slightly changes after 10 cycles of UVGI. (B) Pressure drop after UVGI treatments remains similar. The larger error bar in the initial data is due to the meltblown fabric originating from various locations on the roll, whereas the meltblown fabrics used in the treatment originated from a similar location on the roll.

Although UV radiation may possess enough energy to break the chemical bonds and degrade polypropylene, the dosage of the sterilization chamber is relatively low, and the material degrades slowly. This finding is supported by previous experiments that showed UV–C doses up to 950 J/cm2 did not appreciably change the filtration efficiency.(36) A possible concern regarding UVGI disinfection for FFRs relates to the UV penetration depth. Because UV–C has a wavelength around 250 nm and polypropylene is a UV absorber, it is difficult to conclude if smaller viral particles deep within the filter can be deactivated through UVGI. If the particles are of a larger size and remain localized on the surface, UVGI may be a candidate for FFR reuse. Furthermore, this means that UVGI requires FFRs not to be stacked, as the incident radiation will only be absorbed by the topmost surface. Another disadvantage is that UVGI was reported to significantly impact the mechanical strength of some FFRs with doses of around 1000 J/cm2.(36)
Therefore, UVGI may be a useful disinfection technique, but the exact exposure or intensity of the UV–C light fluence on the mask surface would need to be verified. The variation in UVGI intensity has been the cause of discrepancies in the literature, as 3M’s own internal reports recently showed that their UVGI treatments damaged particular FFRs,(37) whereas other reports show that UVGI cycling on multiple N95 FFRs had minimal or no impact.(31)
Most of our tests were performed on meltblown fabrics with an initial efficiency of >95% due to the current shortage of FFRs, leaving concern over whether other FFR components (straps, valves, nosepiece, foam, etc.) can change in these treatment environments. These components can impact the fit and sealing of the FFR, which is equally important as the FFR efficiency itself. From our experiments, we also used typical N95-grade FFRs to test the strap elasticity and structural integrity after heat treatments. We noted no apparent or qualitative change in the strap elasticity or fit compared with the untreated model for the heat treatments, and quantitative studies confirmed this finding.(38) Although no qualitative damage was observed on the UV-treated FFRs, quantitative tests revealed that UVGI treatments at this dosage can lead to improper fitting.(38)
Because actually donning and using the respirator impacts the structural stability of such components, particular care needs to be taken in the interpretation of these results. Previous reports indicated that FFRs can safely be worn up to five times, but beyond five times may result in a less-than-adequate fit.(39) During this crisis, users have to make sure that the fit of the FFRs after treatment is adequate and that they are not left vulnerable due to leakage. Mask producers or users may need to consider straps that are more robust for reuse or that can withstand treatment conditions.

Conclusions

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

In conclusion, COVID-19 is an extremely contagious disease that requires healthcare professionals to take caution with necessary protective equipment. The current shortage of N95 FFRs during this time of rapidly spreading infection may be mitigated by methods that will enable their safe reuse. We tested methods that may be suitable for the reuse of particulate respirators and hope our results will be useful in helping hospitals, health care facilities, and the public in formulating safe standard operating procedures so that virus inactivation is assured while not compromising mask protection. We reiterate that although these methods were not tested on FFRs that have been exposed to SARS-CoV-2, these methods use disinfection precedents set by either SARS-CoV or recent data based on inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 in solution. We found that of commonly deployable methods, heating (dry or in the presence humidity) <100 °C can preserve the filtration characteristics of a pristine N95 respirator. The UVGI (254 nm, 8 W) sterilizer cabinet used in these tests does not have enough dose to impact the filtration properties within a reasonable number of treatment cycles and may be considered for disinfection, however the exact dose output of the cabinet would need to be determined such that it is suitable for inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 with minimal FFR damage. Using steam to disinfect requires caution, as the treatments may seem to be suitable, but prolonged treatment may leave the user with unsuitable protection. Finally, we advise against liquid contact, such as alcohol solutions, chlorine-based solutions, or soaps to clean the respirator, as this will lead to a degradation in the static charge that is necessary for the FFR to meet the N95 standard.

Methods

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Sample Preparation

Meltblown fabric was procured from Guangdong Meltblown Technology Co., Ltd. under the sample name TM95 with a 20 g/m2 basis weight and initial filtration efficiency of ≥95%. All of the meltblown samples used were from this source. Each sample was cut to approximately 15 cm × 15 cm. All sample testing was performed on an Automated Filter Tester 8130A (TSI, Inc.) using a flow rate of 32 L/min and NaCl as the aerosol (0.26 μm mass median diameter). Each average measurement contains at least three individual sample measurements.
We chose disposable N95-grade FFRs for testing: 3M 8210 (NIOSH N95), 4C Air, Inc. (GB2626 KN95), ESound (GB2626 KN95), and Onnuriplan (KFDA KF94). These FFRs are referred to as “3M”, “4C”, “ES”, and “OP”, respectively, in figures. Full FFR testing used a flow rate of 85 L/min.
Scanning electron microscope images were recorded using a Phenom Pro SEM, at 10 kV.

Heat Treatment

Samples were loaded into a preheated five-sided heating chamber (Across International, LLC or SH-642, ESPEC) at the temperatures and times given in the main text. Dry heat was applied using the Across International vacuum heating oven under ambient conditions. In the case of the SH-642, the humidity was set to the lowest value (30% RH up to 85 °C; above 85 °C, the humidity is <30% but cannot be controlled). High humidity (100% RH) was simulated via sealing meltblown fabrics, or FFRs, inside a polyethylene bag with 0.3 mL of water and placing them inside the SH-642 chamber. The resting time between cycles was 10 min for the 75 and 85 °C treatments and 5 min for the 100 and 125 °C treatments. After resting, the samples were returned to the chamber to begin the next cycle. We initially chose 75 °C due to the presence of blanket warming ovens in hospital environments that can reach ∼80 °C. Further experiments used 85 °C, in the event that 75 °C is insufficient to inactivate SARS-CoV-2. Microwaving was not considered as many FFRs contain metals which may spark and melt the fabric.

Steam Treatment

Three samples were stacked on top of a beaker with boiling water inside (at around 15 cm above the water). The samples were left on top of the beaker and steamed for 10 min, and afterward they were left to air-dry completely (to touch). Samples were either tested or placed back on top of the beaker to continue the next treatment cycle.

Alcohol Treatment

Samples were immersed into a solution of 75% ethanol and left to air-dry (hanging) and subsequently tested.

Chlorine Solution Treatment

Samples were sprayed with approximately 0.3–0.5 mL of household chlorine-based disinfectant (∼2% NaClO). Samples were left to air-dry and off-gas completely,while hanging. Samples were tested.

UVGI

Samples were placed into a UV sterilizer cabinet (CHS-208A), with a 254 nm, 8 W lamp, and 475 cm2 internal area. Samples were irradiated for 30 min and left to stand under ambient conditions for 10 min per cycle. Samples were either returned to the chamber for the next cycle or tested.

Supporting Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsnano.0c03597.

  • Additional SEM images, plots, and tables with compiled data (PDF)

Terms & Conditions

Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Author Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

  • Corresponding Author
    • Yi Cui - Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United StatesStanford Institute for Materials and Energy Sciences, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Menlo Park, California 94025, United StatesOrcidhttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-6103-6352 Email: [email protected]
  • Authors
    • Lei Liao - 4C Air, Inc., Sunnyvale, California 94089, United States
    • Wang Xiao - 4C Air, Inc., Sunnyvale, California 94089, United States
    • Mervin Zhao - 4C Air, Inc., Sunnyvale, California 94089, United StatesOrcidhttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-7313-7150
    • Xuanze Yu - 4C Air, Inc., Sunnyvale, California 94089, United States
    • Haotian Wang - 4C Air, Inc., Sunnyvale, California 94089, United States
    • Qiqi Wang - 4C Air, Inc., Sunnyvale, California 94089, United States
    • Steven Chu - Department of Physics, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United StatesDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Physiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United States
  • Author Contributions

    L.L. and Y.C. designed the experiments. L.L., W.X., M.Z., X.Y., and H.W. collected the data. L.L., M.Z., Q.W., and Y.C. analyzed the data and interpreted results. M.Z., L.L., Q.W., Y.C., and S.C. wrote the manuscript.

  • Notes

    The authors declare the following competing financial interest(s): Professors Steven Chu and Yi Cui are founders and shareholders of the company 4C Air, Inc. They are inventors on patent PCT /US2015/065608. All other authors are employees of 4C Air, Inc.

Acknowledgments

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

We would like to thank L. Chu and A. Price at Stanford Medicine for the helpful discussion.

References

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This article references 39 other publications.

  1. 1
    Dong, E.; Du, H.; Gardner, L. An Interactive Web-Based Dashboard to Track COVID-19 in Real Time. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2020, 20, 533534,  DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30120-1
  2. 2
    Zhou, P.; Yang, X.-L.; Wang, X.-G.; Hu, B.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, W.; Si, H.-R.; Zhu, Y.; Li, B.; Huang, C.-L.; Chen, H.-D.; Chen, J.; Luo, Y.; Guo, H.; Jiang, R.-D.; Liu, M.-Q.; Chen, Y.; Shen, X.-R.; Wang, X.; Zheng, X.-S. A Pneumonia Outbreak Associated with a New Coronavirus of Probable Bat Origin. Nature 2020, 579, 270273,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-020-2012-7
  3. 3
    Wu, F.; Zhao, S.; Yu, B.; Chen, Y.-M.; Wang, W.; Song, Z.-G.; Hu, Y.; Tao, Z.-W.; Tian, J.-H.; Pei, Y.-Y.; Yuan, M.-L.; Zhang, Y.-L.; Dai, F.-H.; Liu, Y.; Wang, Q.-M.; Zheng, J.-J.; Xu, L.; Holmes, E. C.; Zhang, Y.-Z. A New Coronavirus Associated with Human Respiratory Disease in China. Nature 2020, 579, 265269,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-020-2008-3
  4. 4
    Letko, M.; Marzi, A.; Munster, V. Functional Assessment of Cell Entry and Receptor Usage for SARS-CoV-2 and Other Lineage B Betacoronaviruses. Nat. Microbiol. 2020, 5, 562569,  DOI: 10.1038/s41564-020-0688-y
  5. 5
    Guan, W.-J.; Ni, Z.-Y.; Hu, Y.; Liang, W.-H.; Ou, C.-Q.; He, J.-X.; Liu, L.; Shan, H.; Lei, C.-L.; Hui, D. S. C.; Du, B.; Li, L.-J.; Zeng, G.; Yuen, K.-Y.; Chen, R.-C.; Tang, C.-L.; Wang, T.; Chen, P.-Y.; Xiang, J.; Li, S.-Y. Clinical Characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in China. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, 17081720,  DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2002032
  6. 6
    Holshue, M. L.; DeBolt, C.; Lindquist, S.; Lofy, K. H.; Wiesman, J.; Bruce, H.; Spitters, C.; Ericson, K.; Wilkerson, S.; Tural, A.; Diaz, G.; Cohn, A.; Fox, L. A.; Patel, A.; Gerber, S. I.; Kim, L.; Tong, S.; Lu, X.; Lindstrom, S.; Pallansch, M. A. First Case of 2019 Novel Coronavirus in the United States. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, 929936,  DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2001191
  7. 7
    Zhu, N.; Zhang, D.; Wang, W.; Li, X.; Yang, B.; Song, J.; Zhao, X.; Huang, B.; Shi, W.; Lu, R.; Niu, P.; Zhan, F.; Ma, X.; Wang, D.; Xu, W.; Wu, G.; Gao, G. F.; Tan, W. A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, 727733,  DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2001017
  8. 8
    Wang, F. S.; Zhang, C. What to Do Next to Control the 2019-NCoV Epidemic?. Lancet 2020, 395, 391393,  DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30300-7
  9. 9
    Bai, Y.; Yao, L.; Wei, T.; Tian, F.; Jin, D.-Y.; Chen, L.; Wang, M. Presumed Asymptomatic Carrier Transmission of COVID-19. JAMA 2020, 323, 1406,  DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.2565
  10. 10
    Baud, D.; Qi, X.; Nielsen-Saines, K.; Musso, D.; Pomar, L.; Favre, G. Real Estimates of Mortality Following COVID-19 Infection. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2020,  DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30195-X
  11. 11
    Tellier, R. Review of Aerosol Transmission of Influenza A Virus. Emerging Infect. Dis. 2006, 12, 16571662,  DOI: 10.3201/eid1211.060426
  12. 12
    Yan, J.; Grantham, M.; Pantelic, J.; De Mesquita, P. J. B.; Albert, B.; Liu, F.; Ehrman, S.; Milton, D. K. Infectious Virus in Exhaled Breath of Symptomatic Seasonal Influenza Cases from a College Community. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2018, 115, 10811086,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1716561115
  13. 13
    Lindsley, W. G.; Blachere, F. M.; Thewlis, R. E.; Vishnu, A.; Davis, K. A.; Cao, G.; Palmer, J. E.; Clark, K. E.; Fisher, M. A.; Khakoo, R.; Beezhold, D. H. Measurements of Airborne Influenza Virus in Aerosol Particles from Human Coughs. PLoS One 2010, 5 (5), e15100,  DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0015100
  14. 14
    Loudon, R. G.; Roberts, R. M. Singing and the Dissemination of Tuberculosis. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 1968, 98, 297300
  15. 15
    CDC Laboratory Performance Evaluation of N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators, 1996. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 1998, 47, 1045
  16. 16
    Rosenstock, L. 42 CFR Part 84: Respiratory Protective Devices Implications for Tuberculosis Protection. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 1995, 16, 529531,  DOI: 10.1086/647174
  17. 17
    NIOSH Interim Guidance on Infection Control Measures for 2009 H1N1 Influenza in Healthcare Settings, Including Protection of Healthcare Personnel. Miss. RN 2009, 71, 1318
  18. 18
    Matsuyama, S.; Nao, N.; Shirato, K.; Kawase, M.; Saito, S.; Takayama, I.; Nagata, N.; Sekizuka, T.; Katoh, H.; Kato, F.; Sakata, M.; Tahara, M.; Kutsuna, S.; Ohmagari, N.; Kuroda, M.; Suzuki, T.; Kageyama, T.; Takeda, M. Enhanced Isolation of SARS-CoV-2 by TMPRSS2- Expressing Cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2020, 117, 70017003,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2002589117
  19. 19
    Bałazy, A.; Toivola, M.; Adhikari, A.; Sivasubramani, S. K.; Reponen, T.; Grinshpun, S. A. Do N95 Respirators Provide 95% Protection Level against Airborne Viruses, and How Adequate Are Surgical Masks?. Am. J. Infect. Control 2006, 34, 5157,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2005.08.018
  20. 20
    Wall, T. H.; Hansen, P. E. Filtering Web for Face Masks and Face Masks Made Therefrom. US3316904A, 1967.
  21. 21
    Ghosal, A.; Sinha-Ray, S.; Yarin, A. L.; Pourdeyhimi, B. Numerical Prediction of the Effect of Uptake Velocity on Three-Dimensional Structure, Porosity and Permeability of Meltblown Nonwoven Laydown. Polymer 2016, 85, 1927,  DOI: 10.1016/j.polymer.2016.01.013
  22. 22
    Kubik, D. A.; Davis, C. I. Melt-Blown Fibrous Electrets. US4215682A, 1980.
  23. 23
    Angadjivand, S. A.; Jones, M. E.; Meyer, D. E. Electret Filter Media. US6119691A, 1994.
  24. 24
    Barrett, L. W.; Rousseau, A. D. Aerosol Loading Performance of Electret Filter Media. Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 1998, 59, 532539,  DOI: 10.1080/15428119891010703
  25. 25
    Ranney, M. L.; Griffeth, V.; Jha, A. K. Critical Supply Shortages — The Need for Ventilators and Personal Protective Equipment during the Covid-19 Pandemic. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, e41  DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp2006141
  26. 26
    van Doremalen, N.; Bushmaker, T.; Morris, D. H.; Holbrook, M. G.; Gamble, A.; Williamson, B. N.; Tamin, A.; Harcourt, J. L.; Thornburg, N. J.; Gerber, S. I.; Lloyd-Smith, J. O.; de Wit, E.; Munster, V. J. Aerosol and Surface Stability of SARS-CoV-2 as Compared with SARS-CoV-1. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, 15641567,  DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc2004973
  27. 27
    Rutala, W. A.; Weber, D. J. Guideline for Disinfection and Sterilization in Healthcare Facilities (2008); Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Atlanta, GA, 2008; pp 1163. https://www.cdc.gov/infectioncontrol/guidelines/disinfection/index.html (accessed 2020/03/28).
  28. 28
    Darnell, M. E. R.; Subbarao, K.; Feinstone, S. M.; Taylor, D. R. Inactivation of the Coronavirus That Induces Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, SARS-CoV. J. Virol. Methods 2004, 121, 8591,  DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2004.06.006
  29. 29
    Rabenau, H. F.; Cinatl, J.; Morgenstern, B.; Bauer, G.; Preiser, W.; Doerr, H. W. Stability and Inactivation of SARS Coronavirus. Med. Microbiol. Immunol. 2005, 194, 16,  DOI: 10.1007/s00430-004-0219-0
  30. 30
    Chin, A. W. H.; Chu, J. T. S.; Perera, M. R. A.; Hui, K. P. Y.; Yen, H.-L.; Chan, M. C. W.; Peiris, M.; Poon, L. L. M. Stability of SARS-CoV-2 in Different Environmental Conditions. Lancet Microbe 2020,  DOI: 10.1016/S2666-5247(20)30003-3
  31. 31
    Bergman, M. S.; Viscusi, D. J.; Heimbuch, B. K.; Wander, J. D.; Sambol, A. R.; Shaffer, R. E. Evaluation of Multiple (3-Cycle) Decontamination Processing for Filtering Facepiece Respirators. J. Eng. Fibers Fabr. 2010, 5, 3341,  DOI: 10.1177/155892501000500405
  32. 32
    Xiao, H.; Song, Y.; Chen, G. Correlation between Charge Decay and Solvent Effect for Melt-Blown Polypropylene Electret Filter Fabrics. J. Electrost. 2014, 72, 311314,  DOI: 10.1016/j.elstat.2014.05.006
  33. 33
    Nazeeri, A. I.; Hilburn, I. A.; Wu, D.-A.; Mohammed, K. A.; Badal, D. Y.; Chan, M. H. W.; Kirschvink, J. L. An Efficient Ethanol-Vacuum Method for the Decontamination and Restoration of Polypropylene Microfiber Medical Masks & Respirators. medRxiv, 2020. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.12.20059709v1 (accessed 2020/04/28).
  34. 34
    Viscusi, D. J.; Bergman, M. S.; Eimer, B. C.; Shaffer, R. E. Evaluation of Five Decontamination Methods for Filtering Facepiece Respirators. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 2009, 53, 815827,  DOI: 10.1093/annhyg/mep070
  35. 35
    Yang, P.; Wang, X. COVID-19: A New Challenge for Human Beings. Cell. Mol. Immunol. 2020, 17, 555557,  DOI: 10.1038/s41423-020-0407-x
  36. 36
    Lindsley, W. G.; Martin, S. B.; Thewlis, R. E.; Sarkisian, K.; Nwoko, J. O.; Mead, K. R.; Noti, J. D. Effects of Ultraviolet Germicidal Irradiation (UVGI) on N95 Respirator Filtration Performance and Structural Integrity. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 2015, 12, 509517,  DOI: 10.1080/15459624.2015.1018518
  37. 37
    Disinfection of Filtering Facepiece Respirators; 3M: St. Paul, MN, 2020; pp 13.
  38. 38
    Price, A. Dp.; Cui, Y.; Liao, L.; Xiao, W.; Yu, X.; Wang, H.; Zhao, M.; Wang, Q.; Chu, S.; Chu, L. F. Is the Fit of N95 Facial Masks Effected by Disinfection? A Study of Heat and UV Disinfection Methods Using the OSHA Protocol Fit Test. medRxiv, 2020. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.14.20062810v1 (accessed 2020/04/28).
  39. 39
    Bergman, M. S.; Viscusi, D. J.; Zhuang, Z.; Palmiero, A. J.; Powell, J. B.; Shaffer, R. E. Impact of Multiple Consecutive Donnings on Filtering Facepiece Respirator Fit. Am. J. Infect. Control 2012, 40, 375380,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2011.05.003

Cited By


This article is cited by 91 publications.

  1. James Malloy, Alberto Quintana, Christopher J. Jensen, Kai Liu. Efficient and Robust Metallic Nanowire Foams for Deep Submicrometer Particulate Filtration. Nano Letters 2021, 21 (7) , 2968-2974. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.1c00050
  2. Jinyeop Lee, Cheolwoo Bong, Wanyoung Lim, Pan Kee Bae, Abdurhaman Teyib Abafogi, Seung Ho Baek, Yong-Beom Shin, Moon Soo Bak, Sungsu Park. Fast and Easy Disinfection of Coronavirus-Contaminated Face Masks Using Ozone Gas Produced by a Dielectric Barrier Discharge Plasma Generator. Environmental Science & Technology Letters 2021, 8 (4) , 339-344. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.estlett.1c00089
  3. Nicolas Castaño, Seth C. Cordts, Myra Kurosu Jalil, Kevin S. Zhang, Saisneha Koppaka, Alison D. Bick, Rajorshi Paul, Sindy K. Y. Tang. Fomite Transmission, Physicochemical Origin of Virus–Surface Interactions, and Disinfection Strategies for Enveloped Viruses with Applications to SARS-CoV-2. ACS Omega 2021, 6 (10) , 6509-6527. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.0c06335
  4. Ilaria Armentano, Marco Barbanera, Eleonora Carota, Silvia Crognale, Marco Marconi, Stefano Rossi, Gianluca Rubino, Mauro Scungio, Juri Taborri, Giuseppe Calabrò. Polymer Materials for Respiratory Protection: Processing, End Use, and Testing Methods. ACS Applied Polymer Materials 2021, 3 (2) , 531-548. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsapm.0c01151
  5. Sean A. MacIsaac, Crystal L. Sweeney, Graham A. Gagnon. Instrument Hacking: Repurposing and Recoding a Multiwell Instrument for Automated, High-Throughput Monochromatic UV Photooxidation of Organic Compounds. ACS ES&T Engineering 2021, 1 (2) , 281-288. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsestengg.0c00123
  6. Yufei Cao, Jun Ge. Study of Specific Receptor Binding Mode Suggests a Possible Enzymatic Disinfectant for SARS-CoV-2. Langmuir 2021, 37 (5) , 1707-1713. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.0c02911
  7. Jie Shi, Yuanzuo Zou, Jie-Xin Wang, Xiao-Fei Zeng, Guang-Wen Chu, Bao-Chang Sun, Dan Wang, Jian-Feng Chen. Investigation on Designing Meltblown Fibers for the Filtering Layer of a Mask by Cross-Scale Simulations. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 2021, 60 (4) , 1962-1971. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.0c06232
  8. Jean Schmitt, Lewis S. Jones, Elise A. Aeby, Christian Gloor, Berthold Moser, Jing Wang. Protection Level and Reusability of a Modified Full-Face Snorkel Mask as Alternative Personal Protective Equipment for Healthcare Workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Chemical Research in Toxicology 2021, 34 (1) , 110-118. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.0c00371
  9. Sumit Kumar, Mamata Karmacharya, Shalik Ram Joshi, Oleksandra Gulenko, Juhee Park, Gun-Ho Kim, Yoon-Kyoung Cho. Photoactive Antiviral Face Mask with Self-Sterilization and Reusability. Nano Letters 2021, 21 (1) , 337-343. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.0c03725
  10. Hye Ryoung Lee, Lei Liao, Wang Xiao, Arturas Vailionis, Antonio J. Ricco, Robin White, Yoshio Nishi, Wah Chiu, Steven Chu, Yi Cui. Three-Dimensional Analysis of Particle Distribution on Filter Layers inside N95 Respirators by Deep Learning. Nano Letters 2021, 21 (1) , 651-657. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.0c04230
  11. Elnaz Esmizadeh, Boon Peng Chang, Dylan Jubinville, Ewomazino Ojogbo, Curtis Seto, Costas Tzoganakis, Tizazu H. Mekonnen. Can Medical-Grade Gloves Provide Protection after Repeated Disinfection?. ACS Applied Polymer Materials 2021, 3 (1) , 445-454. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsapm.0c01202
  12. Xiaoli Shan, Han Zhang, Cihui Liu, Liyan Yu, Yunsong Di, Xiaowei Zhang, Lifeng Dong, Zhixing Gan. Reusable Self-Sterilization Masks Based on Electrothermal Graphene Filters. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2020, 12 (50) , 56579-56586. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.0c16754
  13. Wonjun Yim, Diyi Cheng, Shiv H. Patel, Rui Kou, Ying Shirley Meng, Jesse V. Jokerst. KN95 and N95 Respirators Retain Filtration Efficiency despite a Loss of Dipole Charge during Decontamination. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2020, 12 (49) , 54473-54480. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.0c17333
  14. Peixin Tang, Zheng Zhang, Ahmed Y El-Moghazy, Nicharee Wisuthiphaet, Nitin Nitin, Gang Sun. Daylight-Induced Antibacterial and Antiviral Cotton Cloth for Offensive Personal Protection. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2020, 12 (44) , 49442-49451. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.0c15540
  15. Weidong He, Yinghe Guo, Hanchao Gao, Jingxian Liu, Yang Yue, Jing Wang. Evaluation of Regeneration Processes for Filtering Facepiece Respirators in Terms of the Bacteria Inactivation Efficiency and Influences on Filtration Performance. ACS Nano 2020, 14 (10) , 13161-13171. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.0c04782
  16. Rafael K. Campos, Jing Jin, Grace H. Rafael, Mervin Zhao, Lei Liao, Graham Simmons, Steven Chu, Scott C. Weaver, Wah Chiu, Yi Cui. Decontamination of SARS-CoV-2 and Other RNA Viruses from N95 Level Meltblown Polypropylene Fabric Using Heat under Different Humidities. ACS Nano 2020, 14 (10) , 14017-14025. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.0c06565
  17. Lei Zhao, Yuhang Qi, Paolo Luzzatto-Fegiz, Yi Cui, Yangying Zhu. COVID-19: Effects of Environmental Conditions on the Propagation of Respiratory Droplets. Nano Letters 2020, 20 (10) , 7744-7750. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.0c03331
  18. Chamteut Oh, Elbashir Araud, Joseph V. Puthussery, Hezi Bai, Gemma G. Clark, Leyi Wang, Vishal Verma, Thanh H. Nguyen. Dry Heat as a Decontamination Method for N95 Respirator Reuse. Environmental Science & Technology Letters 2020, 7 (9) , 677-682. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.estlett.0c00534
  19. Andrea N. Giordano, Casey R. Christopher. Repurposing Best Teaching Practices for Remote Learning Environments: Chemistry in the News and Oral Examinations During COVID-19. Journal of Chemical Education 2020, 97 (9) , 2815-2818. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00753
  20. Hong Zhong, Zhaoran Zhu, Peng You, Jing Lin, Chi Fai Cheung, Vivien L. Lu, Feng Yan, Ching-Yuen Chan, Guijun Li. Plasmonic and Superhydrophobic Self-Decontaminating N95 Respirators. ACS Nano 2020, 14 (7) , 8846-8854. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.0c03504
  21. Frankie Wood-Black, Jeff Lewin, Michael B. Blayney, Lusiana Galindo, Robert Foreman, Marina Zelivyanskaya, Marc Reid. Highlights: Reusing Masks, Face Covering Efficacy, Plant Restarts, and More. ACS Chemical Health & Safety 2020, 27 (4) , 204-208. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chas.0c00069
  22. Mervin Zhao, Lei Liao, Wang Xiao, Xuanze Yu, Haotian Wang, Qiqi Wang, Ying Ling Lin, F. Selcen Kilinc-Balci, Amy Price, Larry Chu, May C. Chu, Steven Chu, Yi Cui. Household Materials Selection for Homemade Cloth Face Coverings and Their Filtration Efficiency Enhancement with Triboelectric Charging. Nano Letters 2020, 20 (7) , 5544-5552. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.0c02211
  23. Hongzhi Yan, Bin Hu, Ruzhu Wang. Air-source heat pump heating based water vapor compression for localized steam sterilization applications during the COVID-19 pandemic. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2021, 145 , 111026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111026
  24. Nikhil Avinash Patil, Prakash Macchindra Gore, Niranjana Jaya Prakash, Premika Govindaraj, Ramdayal Yadav, Vivek Verma, Dhivya Shanmugarajan, Shivanand Patil, Abhay Kore, Balasubramanian Kandasubramanian. Needleless electrospun phytochemicals encapsulated nanofibre based 3-ply biodegradable mask for combating COVID-19 pandemic. Chemical Engineering Journal 2021, 416 , 129152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2021.129152
  25. Lu Li, Xiaoli Zhao, Zhouyang Li, Kang Song. COVID-19: Performance study of microplastic inhalation risk posed by wearing masks. Journal of Hazardous Materials 2021, 411 , 124955. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124955
  26. Sunghoon Jung, Jun-Yeoung Yang, Eun-Yeon Byeon, Do-Geun Kim, Da-Gyum Lee, Sungweon Ryoo, Sanggu Lee, Cheol-Woong Shin, Ho Won Jang, Hyo Jung Kim, Seunghun Lee. Copper-Coated Polypropylene Filter Face Mask with SARS-CoV-2 Antiviral Ability. Polymers 2021, 13 (9) , 1367. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13091367
  27. Leili Javidpour, Anže Božič, Ali Naji, Rudolf Podgornik. Electrostatic interactions between the SARS-CoV-2 virus and a charged electret fibre. Soft Matter 2021, 17 (16) , 4296-4303. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1SM00232E
  28. Zan Zhu, Yu Zhang, Liang Bao, Jianping Chen, Shun Duan, Sheng-Chieh Chen, Ping Xu, Wei-Ning Wang. Self-decontaminating nanofibrous filters for efficient particulate matter removal and airborne bacteria inactivation. Environmental Science: Nano 2021, 8 (4) , 1081-1095. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0EN01230K
  29. Haedi E. DeAngelis, Anne M. Grillet, Martin B. Nemer, Maryla A. Wasiolek, Don J. Hanson, Michael A. Omana, Andres L. Sanchez, David W. Vehar, Paul M. Thelen, . Gamma radiation sterilization of N95 respirators leads to decreased respirator performance. PLOS ONE 2021, 16 (4) , e0248859. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248859
  30. Dylan P. Griswold, Andres Gempeler, Angelos Kolias, Peter J. Hutchinson, Andres M. Rubiano. Personal protective equipment for reducing the risk of COVID-19 infection among health care workers involved in emergency trauma surgery during the pandemic: An umbrella review. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery 2021, 90 (4) , e72-e80. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000003073
  31. Wafa K. Essa, Suhad A. Yasin, Ibtisam A. Saeed, Gomaa A. M. Ali. Nanofiber-Based Face Masks and Respirators as COVID-19 Protection: A Review. Membranes 2021, 11 (4) , 250. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes11040250
  32. Douglas J Perkins, Robert A Nofchissey, Chunyan Ye, Nathan Donart, Alison Kell, Ivy Foo-Hurwitz, Timothy Muller, Steven B Bradfute. COVID-19 global pandemic planning: Dry heat incubation and ambient temperature fail to consistently inactivate SARS-CoV-2 on N95 respirators. Experimental Biology and Medicine 2021, 246 (8) , 952-959. https://doi.org/10.1177/1535370220977819
  33. Imran Maqbool, Faisal Rehman, Faheeda Soomro, Zubeda Bhatti, Umeed Ali, Ashique Hussain Jatoi, Bhajan Lal, Muzaffar Iqbal, Shahnawaz Phulpoto, Akbar Ali, Khalid Hussain Thebo. Graphene‐based Materials for Fighting Coronavirus Disease 2019: Challenges and Opportunities. ChemBioEng Reviews 2021, 8 (2) , 67-77. https://doi.org/10.1002/cben.202000039
  34. Dion T. S. Li, Lakshman Perera Samaranayake, Yiu Yan Leung, Prasanna Neelakantan. Facial protection in the era of COVID‐19: A narrative review. Oral Diseases 2021, 27 (S3) , 665-673. https://doi.org/10.1111/odi.13460
  35. Jerry T.J. Ju, Leah Boisvert, Yi Y. Zuo. Face masks against COVID-19: Standards, efficacy, testing and decontamination methods. Advances in Colloid and Interface Science 2021, 141 , 102435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2021.102435
  36. E. Esmizadeh, B.P. Chang, D. Jubinville, C. Seto, E. Ojogbo, C. Tzoganakis, T.H. Mekonnen. Stability of nitrile and vinyl latex gloves under repeated disinfection cycles. Materials Today Sustainability 2021, 323 , 100067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtsust.2021.100067
  37. Laura M. Henning, Amanmyrat Abdullayev, Cekdar Vakifahmetoglu, Ulla Simon, Hiba Bensalah, Aleksander Gurlo, Maged F. Bekheet. Review on Polymeric, Inorganic, and Composite Materials for Air Filters: From Processing to Properties. Advanced Energy and Sustainability Research 2021, 163 , 2100005. https://doi.org/10.1002/aesr.202100005
  38. Bimalendu Adhikari, Nihar Sahu. COVID‐19 into Chemical Science Perspective: Chemical Preventive Measures and Drug Development. ChemistrySelect 2021, 6 (9) , 2010-2028. https://doi.org/10.1002/slct.202100127
  39. Max A. Schumm, Joseph E. Hadaya, Nisha Mody, Bethany A. Myers, Melinda Maggard-Gibbons. Filtering Facepiece Respirator (N95 Respirator) Reprocessing. JAMA 2021, 9 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.2531
  40. Abhishek Kumar, Anu Sharma, Yi Chen, Megan M. Jones, Stephen T. Vanyo, Changning Li, Michelle B. Visser, Supriya D. Mahajan, Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Mark T. Swihart. [email protected]‐8 Core‐Shell Nanowires for Reusable Antimicrobial Face Masks. Advanced Functional Materials 2021, 31 (10) , 2008054. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202008054
  41. Sejin Choi, Hyeonyeol Jeon, Min Jang, Hyeri Kim, Giyoung Shin, Jun Mo Koo, Minkyung Lee, Hye Kyeong Sung, Youngho Eom, Ho‐Sung Yang, Jonggeon Jegal, Jeyoung Park, Dongyeop X. Oh, Sung Yeon Hwang. Biodegradable, Efficient, and Breathable Multi‐Use Face Mask Filter. Advanced Science 2021, 8 (6) , 2003155. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202003155
  42. Rajib Banerjee, Pulakesh Roy, Surajeet Das, Manash K. Paul. A hybrid model integrating warm heat and ultraviolet germicidal irradiation might efficiently disinfect respirators and personal protective equipment. American Journal of Infection Control 2021, 49 (3) , 309-318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2020.07.022
  43. Thomas Huber, Olivia Goldman, Alexander E. Epstein, Gianna Stella, Thomas P. Sakmar. Principles and practice for SARS-CoV-2 decontamination of N95 masks with UV-C. Biophysical Journal 2021, 382 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpj.2021.02.039
  44. Neha Parashar, Subrata Hait. Plastics in the time of COVID-19 pandemic: Protector or polluter?. Science of The Total Environment 2021, 759 , 144274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144274
  45. Talita Nicolau, Núbio Gomes Filho, Andrea Zille. Ultraviolet-C as a Viable Reprocessing Method for Disposable Masks and Filtering Facepiece Respirators. Polymers 2021, 13 (5) , 801. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13050801
  46. Peng Jiang, Yee Van Fan, Jiří Jaromír Klemeš. Impacts of COVID-19 on energy demand and consumption: Challenges, lessons and emerging opportunities. Applied Energy 2021, 285 , 116441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.116441
  47. Jakyung Eun, Hansol Lee, Sangmin Jeon. Regeneration of an electret filter by contact electrification. RSC Advances 2021, 11 (8) , 4610-4615. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0RA09769A
  48. Loïc Anderegg, John Doyle, Margaret L. Gardel, Amit Gupta, Christian Hallas, Yuri Lensky, Nancy G. Love, Bronwyn A. Lucas, Edward Mazenc, Cole Meisenhelder, Ajay Pillarisetti, Daniel Ranard, Allison H. Squires, Jessica Vechakul, Nathaniel B. Vilas, Stuart Williams, Daniel Wilson, Tyler N. Chen, . Heat and Humidity for Bioburden Reduction of N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators. Applied Biosafety 2021, 56 https://doi.org/10.1089/apb.20.0053
  49. Angela S. Andrews, John R. Powers, Jaclyn K Cichowicz, Christopher C. Coffey, Marisa L. Fries, Patrick L. Yorio, Maryann M. D'Alessandro. Respiratory Protection in a Time of Crisis: NIOSH Testing of International Respiratory Protective Devices for Emergency Use. Health Security 2021, https://doi.org/10.1089/hs.2020.0173
  50. Neil J. Rowan, John G. Laffey. Unlocking the surge in demand for personal and protective equipment (PPE) and improvised face coverings arising from coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic – Implications for efficacy, re-use and sustainable waste management. Science of The Total Environment 2021, 752 , 142259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142259
  51. Stuart J. Williams. Assessment of a Food-Warming Cabinet for Heat and Humidity Decontamination of N95 Respirators. Journal of Heat Transfer 2021, 143 (1) https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4048739
  52. Adriana Cristina de Oliveira, Thabata Coaglio Lucas. Is it possible to decontaminate N95 masks in pandemic times? integrative literature review. Revista Gaúcha de Enfermagem 2021, 42 (spe) https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-1447.2021.20200146
  53. Mahdieh Delikhoon, Marcelo I. Guzman, Ramin Nabizadeh, Abbas Norouzian Baghani. Modes of Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and Factors Influencing on the Airborne Transmission: A Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2021, 18 (2) , 395. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18020395
  54. Joren Van Loon, Lore Veelaert, Sander Van Goethem, Regan Watts, Stijn Verwulgen, Jouke C. Verlinden, Els Du Bois. Reuse of Filtering Facepiece Respirators in the COVID-19 Era. Sustainability 2021, 13 (2) , 797. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020797
  55. SUMIYO HIRUMA, YUUKI HATA, MASAYUKI ISHIHARA, TOMOHIRO TAKAYAMA, SHINGO NAKAMURA, NAOKO ANDO, KOICHI FUKUDA, YOKO SATO, KAORU MURAKAMI, HIDETAKA YOKOE. Efficacy of Bioshell Calcium Oxide Water as Disinfectants to Enable Face Mask Reuse. Biocontrol Science 2021, 26 (1) , 27-35. https://doi.org/10.4265/bio.26.27
  56. Lydia Cassorla. Decontamination and Reuse of N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators: Where Do We Stand?. Anesthesia & Analgesia 2021, 132 (1) , 2-14. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000005254
  57. Benjamin Valdez-Salas, Ernesto Beltran-Partida, Nelson Cheng, Jorge Salvador-Carlos, Ernesto Alonso Valdez-Salas, Mario Curiel-Alvarez, Roberto Ibarra-Wiley. Promotion of Surgical Masks Antimicrobial Activity by Disinfection and Impregnation with Disinfectant Silver Nanoparticles. International Journal of Nanomedicine 2021, Volume 16 , 2689-2702. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S301212
  58. Rasha Maal-Bared, Jennifer Loudon. Strategies for managing N95 mask shortages at water resource recovery facilities during pandemics: a review. Water Science and Technology 2020, 82 (12) , 2798-2812. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2020.537
  59. Benjamin E. Steinberg, Kazuyoshi Aoyama, Mark McVey, David Levin, Asad Siddiqui, Farrukh Munshey, Neil M. Goldenberg, David Faraoni, Jason T. Maynes. Efficacy and safety of decontamination for N95 respirator reuse: a systematic literature search and narrative synthesis. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie 2020, 67 (12) , 1814-1823. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-020-01770-w
  60. Carlos E. Rodriguez-Martinez, Monica P. Sossa-Briceño, Jorge A. Cortés. Decontamination and reuse of N95 filtering facemask respirators: A systematic review of the literature. American Journal of Infection Control 2020, 48 (12) , 1520-1532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2020.07.004
  61. L. Yu, G.K. Peel, F.H. Cheema, W.S. Lawrence, N. Bukreyeva, C.W. Jinks, J.E. Peel, J.W. Peterson, S. Paessler, M. Hourani, Z. Ren. Catching and killing of airborne SARS-CoV-2 to control spread of COVID-19 by a heated air disinfection system. Materials Today Physics 2020, 15 , 100249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtphys.2020.100249
  62. Richard E. Peltier, Jiayuan Wang, Brian L. Hollenbeck, Jennifer Lanza, Ryan M. Furtado, Jay Cyr, Richard T. Ellison, Kimiyoshi J. Kobayashi. Addressing decontaminated respirators: Some methods appear to damage mask integrity and protective function. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology 2020, 41 (12) , 1446-1448. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2020.332
  63. Andreas F. Widmer, Gilles Richner. Proposal for a EN 149 acceptable reprocessing method for FFP2 respirators in times of severe shortage. Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control 2020, 9 (1) https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-020-00744-3
  64. Dongxiao Ji, Li Fan, Xiaoxia Li, Seeram Ramakrishna. Addressing the worldwide shortages of face masks. BMC Materials 2020, 2 (1) https://doi.org/10.1186/s42833-020-00015-w
  65. Jiří Jaromír Klemeš, Yee Van Fan, Peng Jiang. The energy and environmental footprints of COVID-19 fighting measures – PPE, disinfection, supply chains. Energy 2020, 211 , 118701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.118701
  66. Jinwei Xu, Xin Xiao, Wenbo Zhang, Rong Xu, Sang Cheol Kim, Yi Cui, Tyler T. Howard, Esther Wu, Yi Cui. Air-Filtering Masks for Respiratory Protection from PM2.5 and Pandemic Pathogens. One Earth 2020, 3 (5) , 574-589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.10.014
  67. Zhongmin Tang, Na Kong, Xingcai Zhang, Yuan Liu, Ping Hu, Shan Mou, Peter Liljeström, Jianlin Shi, Weihong Tan, Jong Seung Kim, Yihai Cao, Robert Langer, Kam W. Leong, Omid C. Farokhzad, Wei Tao. A materials-science perspective on tackling COVID-19. Nature Reviews Materials 2020, 5 (11) , 847-860. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41578-020-00247-y
  68. Desmond Leddin, David Armstrong, Raja A. Raja Ali, Alan Barkun, Amna S. Butt, Ye Chen, Harshit S. Khara, Yeong Yeh Lee, Wai Keung Leung, Finlay Macrae, Govind Makharia, Reza Malekzadeh, Elias Makhoul, Anahita Sadeghi, Jean-Christophe Saurin, Mark Topazian, Sandie R. Thomson, Andrew Veitch, Kaichun Wu. Personal Protective Equipment for Endoscopy in Low-Resource Settings During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology 2020, 54 (10) , 833-840. https://doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000001411
  69. Ambra Di Altobrando, Michelangelo La Placa, Iria Neri, Bianca Maria Piraccini, Colombina Vincenzi. Contact dermatitis due to masks and respirators during COVID ‐19 pandemic: What we should know and what we should do. Dermatologic Therapy 2020, 33 (6) https://doi.org/10.1111/dth.14528
  70. Shiv Dalla, Rohit Shinde, Jack Ayres, Stephen Waller, Jay Nachtigal. 3D-printed snorkel mask adapter for failed N95 fit tests and personal protective equipment shortages. Journal of 3D Printing in Medicine 2020, 4 (4) , 203-209. https://doi.org/10.2217/3dp-2020-0018
  71. Dan Wang, Bao-Chang Sun, Jie-Xin Wang, Yun-Yun Zhou, Zhuo-Wei Chen, Yan Fang, Wei-Hua Yue, Si-Min Liu, Ke-Yang Liu, Xiao-Fei Zeng, Guang-Wen Chu, Jian-Feng Chen. Can Masks Be Reused After Hot Water Decontamination During the COVID-19 Pandemic?. Engineering 2020, 6 (10) , 1115-1121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2020.05.016
  72. David Vernez, Jonathan Save, Anne Oppliger, Nicolas Concha-Lozano, Nancy B Hopf, Hélène Niculita-Hirzel, Grégory Resch, Véronique Michaud, Laurie Dorange-Pattoret, Nicole Charrière, Kiattisak Batsungnoen, Guillaume Suarez. Reusability of filtering facepiece respirators after decontamination through drying and germicidal UV irradiation. BMJ Global Health 2020, 5 (10) , e003110. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003110
  73. Daniel L. Chao, Jayanth Sridhar, Ajay E. Kuriyan, Theodore Leng, Brad P. Barnett, Aaron F. Carlin, Charles C. Wykoff, Stephen Gayer, Prithvi Mruthyunjaya, Yoshihiro Yonekawa, Amani A. Fawzi, Audina M. Berrocal, Steven Yeh, Daniel Ting, Yasha Modi, David N. Zacks, Nicholas Yannuzzi, Natalie A. Afshari, Timothy Murray. Rationale for American Society of Retina Specialists Best Practice Recommendations for Conducting Vitreoretinal Surgery During the Coronavirus Disease-19 Era. Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases 2020, 4 (5) , 420-429. https://doi.org/10.1177/2474126420941707
  74. Haifeng Zhang, Nuo Liu, Qianru Zeng, Jinxin Liu, Xing Zhang, Mingzheng Ge, Wei Zhang, Suying Li, Yijun Fu, Yu Zhang. Design of Polypropylene Electret Melt Blown Nonwovens with Superior Filtration Efficiency Stability through Thermally Stimulated Charging. Polymers 2020, 12 (10) , 2341. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12102341
  75. Wilson C. K. Poon, Aidan T. Brown, Susana O. L. Direito, Daniel J. M. Hodgson, Lucas Le Nagard, Alex Lips, Cait E. MacPhee, Davide Marenduzzo, John R. Royer, Andreia F. Silva, Job H. J. Thijssen, Simon Titmuss. Soft matter science and the COVID-19 pandemic. Soft Matter 2020, 16 (36) , 8310-8324. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0SM01223H
  76. Hui Liu, Shichao Zhang, Lifang Liu, Jianyong Yu, Bin Ding. High-performance filters from biomimetic wet-adhesive nanoarchitectured networks. Journal of Materials Chemistry A 2020, 8 (36) , 18955-18962. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0TA06886A
  77. Jun Li, Yin Long, Fan Yang, Xudong Wang. Respiration‐driven triboelectric nanogenerators for biomedical applications. EcoMat 2020, 2 (3) https://doi.org/10.1002/eom2.12045
  78. Maria Soler, Alexis Scholtz, Rene Zeto, Andrea M. Armani. Engineering photonics solutions for COVID-19. APL Photonics 2020, 5 (9) , 090901. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0021270
  79. Emroj Hossain, Satyanu Bhadra, Harsh Jain, Soumen Das, Arnab Bhattacharya, Shankar Ghosh, Dov Levine. Recharging and rejuvenation of decontaminated N95 masks. Physics of Fluids 2020, 32 (9) , 093304. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0023940
  80. Neva Jacobs, Kathy Chan, Veruscka Leso, Andrea D’Anna, Dana Hollins, Ivo Iavicoli. A critical review of methods for decontaminating filtering facepiece respirators. Toxicology and Industrial Health 2020, 36 (9) , 654-680. https://doi.org/10.1177/0748233720964652
  81. Martin Purschke, Mazzin Elsamaloty, Jeffrey P. Wilde, Nichole Starr, R. Rox Anderson, William A. Farinelli, Fernanda H. Sakamoto, Maryann Tung, Joshua Tam, Lambertus Hesselink, Thomas M. Baer. Construction and validation of UV-C decontamination cabinets for filtering facepiece respirators. Applied Optics 2020, 59 (25) , 7585. https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.401602
  82. José G. B. Derraik, William A. Anderson, Elizabeth A. Connelly, Yvonne C. Anderson. Rapid Review of SARS-CoV-1 and SARS-CoV-2 Viability, Susceptibility to Treatment, and the Disinfection and Reuse of PPE, Particularly Filtering Facepiece Respirators. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2020, 17 (17) , 6117. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17176117
  83. Te Faye Yap, Zhen Liu, Rachel A. Shveda, Daniel J. Preston. A predictive model of the temperature-dependent inactivation of coronaviruses. Applied Physics Letters 2020, 117 (6) , 060601. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0020782
  84. Ming Hui Chua, Weiren Cheng, Shermin Simin Goh, Junhua Kong, Bing Li, Jason Y. C. Lim, Lu Mao, Suxi Wang, Kun Xue, Le Yang, Enyi Ye, Kangyi Zhang, Wun Chet Davy Cheong, Beng Hoon Tan, Zibiao Li, Ban Hock Tan, Xian Jun Loh. Face Masks in the New COVID-19 Normal: Materials, Testing, and Perspectives. Research 2020, 2020 , 1-40. https://doi.org/10.34133/2020/7286735
  85. Samir Haj Bloukh, Zehra Edis, Annis A. Shaikh, Habib M. Pathan. A Look Behind the Scenes at COVID-19: National Strategies of Infection Control and Their Impact on Mortality. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2020, 17 (15) , 5616. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17155616
  86. John B Lynch, Perica Davitkov, Deverick J Anderson, Adarsh Bhimraj, Vincent Chi-Chung Cheng, Judith Guzman-Cottrill, Jasmine Dhindsa, Abhijit Duggal, Mamta K Jain, Grace M Lee, Stephen Y Liang, Allison McGeer, Valery Lavergne, M Hassan Murad, Reem A Mustafa, Rebecca L Morgan, Yngve Falck-Ytter, Shahnaz Sultan. Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on Infection Prevention for Healthcare Personnel Caring for Patients With Suspected or Known Coronavirus Disease 2019. Clinical Infectious Diseases 2020, 3 https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa1063
  87. Josabet Johana Arellano-Cotrina, Nicole Marengo-Coronel, Katherine Joselyn Atoche-Socola, Claudio Peña-Soto, Luis Ernesto Arriola-Guillén. Effectiveness and Recommendations for the Use of Dental Masks in the Prevention of COVID-19: A Literature Review. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness 2020, 55 , 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2020.255
  88. B. V. Sarada, R. Vijay, R. Johnson, T. Narasinga Rao, G. Padmanabham. Fight Against COVID-19: ARCI’s Technologies for Disinfection. Transactions of the Indian National Academy of Engineering 2020, 5 (2) , 349-354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41403-020-00153-3
  89. H. Morris, R. Murray. Medical textiles. Textile Progress 2020, 52 (1-2) , 1-127. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405167.2020.1824468
  90. Emily Mantlo, Tanya Rhodes, Jenny Boutros, Laura Patterson-Fortin, Alex Evans, Slobodan Paessler. In vitro efficacy of a copper iodine complex PPE disinfectant for SARS-CoV-2 inactivation. F1000Research 2020, 9 , 674. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.24651.1
  91. Jacqueline N. Chu, Omkar Ghenand, Joy Collins, James Byrne, Adam Wentworth, Peter R. Chai, Farah Z. Dadabhoy, Chin Hur, Giovanni Traverso. Thinking Green: Respirator Reuse Strategies to Reduce Cost and Waste. SSRN Electronic Journal 2020, 382 https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3746257
  • Abstract

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 through viral aerosols. Image of SARS-CoV-2 courtesy of the CDC.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. Meltblown fabrics in N95 FFRs. (A) Peeling apart a representative N95 FFR reveals multiple layers of nonwoven materials. (B) Scanning electron microscope (SEM) cross-section image reveals the middle meltblown layer has thinner fibers with thickness around 300 μm. (C) SEM image of meltblown fibers reveals a complicated randomly oriented network of fibers, with diameters in the range of ∼1–10 μm. (D) Schematic illustration of meltblown fibers (left) without and (right) with electret charging. In the left figure, smaller particles are able to pass through to the user, but particles are electrostatically captured in the case of an electret (right).

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. The 10 treatment cycle evolution of filtration characteristics. (A) Efficiency evolution where it is clear that steam treatment results in a degradation of efficiency. (B) Pressure drop evolution where it is not apparent that any structure or morphology change has occurred in the meltblown fabrics.

    Figure 4

    Figure 4. Temperature and humidity evolution of meltblown and FFR filtration characteristics. (A, B) Evolution of meltblown fabrics’ filtration characteristics at 85 °C under different humidities, efficiency (A) and pressure drop (B). (C, D) Evolution of filtration characteristics on a meltblown fabric under 85 °C, 30% RH, efficiency (C) and pressure drop (D). (E, F) Evolution of the filtration characteristics on an N95-level FFRs with 85 °C, under 30% and 100% RH (measured at a flow rate of 85 L/min), efficiency (E) and pressure drop (F). The left-to-right of all FFR brands is as follows: (1) initial (leftmost, solid pattern, tested in ambient conditions), (2) 85 °C, 30% RH 10 cycles, (3) 85 °C, 30% RH 20 cycles, (4) 85 °C, 100% RH 10 cycles, and (5) 85 °C, 100% RH 20 cycles. (G, H) Temperature dependence of meltblown fabrics’ filtration characteristics over 20 cycles with RH < 30%, efficiency (G) and pressure drop (H).

    Figure 5

    Figure 5. Effect of UVGI on meltblown filtration characteristics. (A) Efficiency of meltblown fabric that slightly changes after 10 cycles of UVGI. (B) Pressure drop after UVGI treatments remains similar. The larger error bar in the initial data is due to the meltblown fabric originating from various locations on the roll, whereas the meltblown fabrics used in the treatment originated from a similar location on the roll.

  • References

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    This article references 39 other publications.

    1. 1
      Dong, E.; Du, H.; Gardner, L. An Interactive Web-Based Dashboard to Track COVID-19 in Real Time. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2020, 20, 533534,  DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30120-1
    2. 2
      Zhou, P.; Yang, X.-L.; Wang, X.-G.; Hu, B.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, W.; Si, H.-R.; Zhu, Y.; Li, B.; Huang, C.-L.; Chen, H.-D.; Chen, J.; Luo, Y.; Guo, H.; Jiang, R.-D.; Liu, M.-Q.; Chen, Y.; Shen, X.-R.; Wang, X.; Zheng, X.-S. A Pneumonia Outbreak Associated with a New Coronavirus of Probable Bat Origin. Nature 2020, 579, 270273,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-020-2012-7
    3. 3
      Wu, F.; Zhao, S.; Yu, B.; Chen, Y.-M.; Wang, W.; Song, Z.-G.; Hu, Y.; Tao, Z.-W.; Tian, J.-H.; Pei, Y.-Y.; Yuan, M.-L.; Zhang, Y.-L.; Dai, F.-H.; Liu, Y.; Wang, Q.-M.; Zheng, J.-J.; Xu, L.; Holmes, E. C.; Zhang, Y.-Z. A New Coronavirus Associated with Human Respiratory Disease in China. Nature 2020, 579, 265269,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-020-2008-3
    4. 4
      Letko, M.; Marzi, A.; Munster, V. Functional Assessment of Cell Entry and Receptor Usage for SARS-CoV-2 and Other Lineage B Betacoronaviruses. Nat. Microbiol. 2020, 5, 562569,  DOI: 10.1038/s41564-020-0688-y
    5. 5
      Guan, W.-J.; Ni, Z.-Y.; Hu, Y.; Liang, W.-H.; Ou, C.-Q.; He, J.-X.; Liu, L.; Shan, H.; Lei, C.-L.; Hui, D. S. C.; Du, B.; Li, L.-J.; Zeng, G.; Yuen, K.-Y.; Chen, R.-C.; Tang, C.-L.; Wang, T.; Chen, P.-Y.; Xiang, J.; Li, S.-Y. Clinical Characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in China. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, 17081720,  DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2002032
    6. 6
      Holshue, M. L.; DeBolt, C.; Lindquist, S.; Lofy, K. H.; Wiesman, J.; Bruce, H.; Spitters, C.; Ericson, K.; Wilkerson, S.; Tural, A.; Diaz, G.; Cohn, A.; Fox, L. A.; Patel, A.; Gerber, S. I.; Kim, L.; Tong, S.; Lu, X.; Lindstrom, S.; Pallansch, M. A. First Case of 2019 Novel Coronavirus in the United States. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, 929936,  DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2001191
    7. 7
      Zhu, N.; Zhang, D.; Wang, W.; Li, X.; Yang, B.; Song, J.; Zhao, X.; Huang, B.; Shi, W.; Lu, R.; Niu, P.; Zhan, F.; Ma, X.; Wang, D.; Xu, W.; Wu, G.; Gao, G. F.; Tan, W. A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, 727733,  DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2001017
    8. 8
      Wang, F. S.; Zhang, C. What to Do Next to Control the 2019-NCoV Epidemic?. Lancet 2020, 395, 391393,  DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30300-7
    9. 9
      Bai, Y.; Yao, L.; Wei, T.; Tian, F.; Jin, D.-Y.; Chen, L.; Wang, M. Presumed Asymptomatic Carrier Transmission of COVID-19. JAMA 2020, 323, 1406,  DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.2565
    10. 10
      Baud, D.; Qi, X.; Nielsen-Saines, K.; Musso, D.; Pomar, L.; Favre, G. Real Estimates of Mortality Following COVID-19 Infection. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2020,  DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30195-X
    11. 11
      Tellier, R. Review of Aerosol Transmission of Influenza A Virus. Emerging Infect. Dis. 2006, 12, 16571662,  DOI: 10.3201/eid1211.060426
    12. 12
      Yan, J.; Grantham, M.; Pantelic, J.; De Mesquita, P. J. B.; Albert, B.; Liu, F.; Ehrman, S.; Milton, D. K. Infectious Virus in Exhaled Breath of Symptomatic Seasonal Influenza Cases from a College Community. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2018, 115, 10811086,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1716561115
    13. 13
      Lindsley, W. G.; Blachere, F. M.; Thewlis, R. E.; Vishnu, A.; Davis, K. A.; Cao, G.; Palmer, J. E.; Clark, K. E.; Fisher, M. A.; Khakoo, R.; Beezhold, D. H. Measurements of Airborne Influenza Virus in Aerosol Particles from Human Coughs. PLoS One 2010, 5 (5), e15100,  DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0015100
    14. 14
      Loudon, R. G.; Roberts, R. M. Singing and the Dissemination of Tuberculosis. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 1968, 98, 297300
    15. 15
      CDC Laboratory Performance Evaluation of N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators, 1996. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 1998, 47, 1045
    16. 16
      Rosenstock, L. 42 CFR Part 84: Respiratory Protective Devices Implications for Tuberculosis Protection. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 1995, 16, 529531,  DOI: 10.1086/647174
    17. 17
      NIOSH Interim Guidance on Infection Control Measures for 2009 H1N1 Influenza in Healthcare Settings, Including Protection of Healthcare Personnel. Miss. RN 2009, 71, 1318
    18. 18
      Matsuyama, S.; Nao, N.; Shirato, K.; Kawase, M.; Saito, S.; Takayama, I.; Nagata, N.; Sekizuka, T.; Katoh, H.; Kato, F.; Sakata, M.; Tahara, M.; Kutsuna, S.; Ohmagari, N.; Kuroda, M.; Suzuki, T.; Kageyama, T.; Takeda, M. Enhanced Isolation of SARS-CoV-2 by TMPRSS2- Expressing Cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2020, 117, 70017003,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2002589117
    19. 19
      Bałazy, A.; Toivola, M.; Adhikari, A.; Sivasubramani, S. K.; Reponen, T.; Grinshpun, S. A. Do N95 Respirators Provide 95% Protection Level against Airborne Viruses, and How Adequate Are Surgical Masks?. Am. J. Infect. Control 2006, 34, 5157,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2005.08.018
    20. 20
      Wall, T. H.; Hansen, P. E. Filtering Web for Face Masks and Face Masks Made Therefrom. US3316904A, 1967.
    21. 21
      Ghosal, A.; Sinha-Ray, S.; Yarin, A. L.; Pourdeyhimi, B. Numerical Prediction of the Effect of Uptake Velocity on Three-Dimensional Structure, Porosity and Permeability of Meltblown Nonwoven Laydown. Polymer 2016, 85, 1927,  DOI: 10.1016/j.polymer.2016.01.013
    22. 22
      Kubik, D. A.; Davis, C. I. Melt-Blown Fibrous Electrets. US4215682A, 1980.
    23. 23
      Angadjivand, S. A.; Jones, M. E.; Meyer, D. E. Electret Filter Media. US6119691A, 1994.
    24. 24
      Barrett, L. W.; Rousseau, A. D. Aerosol Loading Performance of Electret Filter Media. Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 1998, 59, 532539,  DOI: 10.1080/15428119891010703
    25. 25
      Ranney, M. L.; Griffeth, V.; Jha, A. K. Critical Supply Shortages — The Need for Ventilators and Personal Protective Equipment during the Covid-19 Pandemic. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, e41  DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp2006141
    26. 26
      van Doremalen, N.; Bushmaker, T.; Morris, D. H.; Holbrook, M. G.; Gamble, A.; Williamson, B. N.; Tamin, A.; Harcourt, J. L.; Thornburg, N. J.; Gerber, S. I.; Lloyd-Smith, J. O.; de Wit, E.; Munster, V. J. Aerosol and Surface Stability of SARS-CoV-2 as Compared with SARS-CoV-1. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, 15641567,  DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc2004973
    27. 27
      Rutala, W. A.; Weber, D. J. Guideline for Disinfection and Sterilization in Healthcare Facilities (2008); Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Atlanta, GA, 2008; pp 1163. https://www.cdc.gov/infectioncontrol/guidelines/disinfection/index.html (accessed 2020/03/28).
    28. 28
      Darnell, M. E. R.; Subbarao, K.; Feinstone, S. M.; Taylor, D. R. Inactivation of the Coronavirus That Induces Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, SARS-CoV. J. Virol. Methods 2004, 121, 8591,  DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2004.06.006
    29. 29
      Rabenau, H. F.; Cinatl, J.; Morgenstern, B.; Bauer, G.; Preiser, W.; Doerr, H. W. Stability and Inactivation of SARS Coronavirus. Med. Microbiol. Immunol. 2005, 194, 16,  DOI: 10.1007/s00430-004-0219-0
    30. 30
      Chin, A. W. H.; Chu, J. T. S.; Perera, M. R. A.; Hui, K. P. Y.; Yen, H.-L.; Chan, M. C. W.; Peiris, M.; Poon, L. L. M. Stability of SARS-CoV-2 in Different Environmental Conditions. Lancet Microbe 2020,  DOI: 10.1016/S2666-5247(20)30003-3
    31. 31
      Bergman, M. S.; Viscusi, D. J.; Heimbuch, B. K.; Wander, J. D.; Sambol, A. R.; Shaffer, R. E. Evaluation of Multiple (3-Cycle) Decontamination Processing for Filtering Facepiece Respirators. J. Eng. Fibers Fabr. 2010, 5, 3341,  DOI: 10.1177/155892501000500405
    32. 32
      Xiao, H.; Song, Y.; Chen, G. Correlation between Charge Decay and Solvent Effect for Melt-Blown Polypropylene Electret Filter Fabrics. J. Electrost. 2014, 72, 311314,  DOI: 10.1016/j.elstat.2014.05.006
    33. 33
      Nazeeri, A. I.; Hilburn, I. A.; Wu, D.-A.; Mohammed, K. A.; Badal, D. Y.; Chan, M. H. W.; Kirschvink, J. L. An Efficient Ethanol-Vacuum Method for the Decontamination and Restoration of Polypropylene Microfiber Medical Masks & Respirators. medRxiv, 2020. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.12.20059709v1 (accessed 2020/04/28).
    34. 34
      Viscusi, D. J.; Bergman, M. S.; Eimer, B. C.; Shaffer, R. E. Evaluation of Five Decontamination Methods for Filtering Facepiece Respirators. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 2009, 53, 815827,  DOI: 10.1093/annhyg/mep070
    35. 35
      Yang, P.; Wang, X. COVID-19: A New Challenge for Human Beings. Cell. Mol. Immunol. 2020, 17, 555557,  DOI: 10.1038/s41423-020-0407-x
    36. 36
      Lindsley, W. G.; Martin, S. B.; Thewlis, R. E.; Sarkisian, K.; Nwoko, J. O.; Mead, K. R.; Noti, J. D. Effects of Ultraviolet Germicidal Irradiation (UVGI) on N95 Respirator Filtration Performance and Structural Integrity. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 2015, 12, 509517,  DOI: 10.1080/15459624.2015.1018518
    37. 37
      Disinfection of Filtering Facepiece Respirators; 3M: St. Paul, MN, 2020; pp 13.
    38. 38
      Price, A. Dp.; Cui, Y.; Liao, L.; Xiao, W.; Yu, X.; Wang, H.; Zhao, M.; Wang, Q.; Chu, S.; Chu, L. F. Is the Fit of N95 Facial Masks Effected by Disinfection? A Study of Heat and UV Disinfection Methods Using the OSHA Protocol Fit Test. medRxiv, 2020. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.14.20062810v1 (accessed 2020/04/28).
    39. 39
      Bergman, M. S.; Viscusi, D. J.; Zhuang, Z.; Palmiero, A. J.; Powell, J. B.; Shaffer, R. E. Impact of Multiple Consecutive Donnings on Filtering Facepiece Respirator Fit. Am. J. Infect. Control 2012, 40, 375380,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2011.05.003
  • Supporting Information

    Supporting Information

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsnano.0c03597.

    • Additional SEM images, plots, and tables with compiled data (PDF)


    Terms & Conditions

    Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

You’ve supercharged your research process with ACS and Mendeley!

STEP 1:
Click to create an ACS ID

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

MENDELEY PAIRING EXPIRED
Your Mendeley pairing has expired. Please reconnect

This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By continuing to use the site, you are accepting our use of cookies. Read the ACS privacy policy.

CONTINUE