Abstract
Personal protective equipment (PPE) including N95 respirators are critical for persons exposed to SARS-CoV-2. KN95 respirators and N95 decontamination protocols have been described as solutions to a lack of such PPE. However, there are a few materials science studies that characterize the charge distribution and physical changes accompanying disinfection treatments particularly heating. Here, we report the filtration efficiency, dipole charge density, and fiber integrity of pristine N95 and KN95 respirators before and after various decontamination methods. We found that the filter layer of N95 is 8-fold thicker than that of KN95, which explains its 10% higher filtration efficiency (97.03 %) versus KN95 (87.76 %) under pristines condition. After 60 minutes of 70 °C treatment, the filtration efficiency and dipole charge density of N95 became 97.16% and 12.48 μC/m2, while those of KN95 were 83.64% and 1.48 μC/m2; moreover, fit factor of N95 was 55 and that of KN95 was 2.7. In conclusion, the KN95 respirator is an inferior alternative of N95 respirator. In both systems, a loss of electrostatic charge does not directly correlate to a decrease in performance.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The authors acknowledge funding from the University of California Tobacco Related-Disease Research Program (TRDRP) under Emergency COVID-19 Research Seed Funding award number R00RG2515. The authors also acknowledge NIH under grants DP2 HL137187 and R21AG065776 and NSP under grant #1845683
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article and/or its supplementary materials.
