PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Ronen, A.
AU  - Rotter, H.
AU  - Elisha, S.
AU  - Sevilia, S.
AU  - Parizer, B.
AU  - Hafif, N.
AU  - Manor, A.
TI  - Investigation of the protection efficacy of face shields against aerosol cough droplets
AID  - 10.1101/2020.07.06.20147090
DP  - 2020 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2020.07.06.20147090
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/11/2020.07.06.20147090.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/11/2020.07.06.20147090.full
AB  - Simple plastic face shields have numerous practical advantages over regular surgical masks. In light of the spreading COVID-19 pandemic, the potential of face shields as a substitution for surgical masks, as a recommendation to the general population, was investigated In order to determine the efficacy of the protective equipment we used a cough simulator that was carefully tuned to replicate human cough in terms of droplet size distribution and jet velocity. The protective equipment considered was placed on a manikin head that simulated human breathing. An Aerodynamic Particle Sizer (APS) was used to analyze the concentration and size distribution of small particles that reached the manikin respiration pathways. Additionally, water sensitive papers were taped on the tested protective equipment and the manikin face, and subsequently photographed and analyzed. In the case of frontal exposure, for droplet diameter larger than 3 μm, the shield efficiency in blocking cough droplets was found to be comparable to that of regular surgical masks, with enhanced protection for portions of the face that the mask does not cover. Additionally, for finer particles, down to 0.3 micron diameter, a shield was found to perform even better, blocking about 10 times more fine particles than the surgical mask. When exposure from the side was considered, the performance of the shield was found to depend dramatically on its geometry. While a narrow shield allowed more droplets and aerosol to penetrate in comparison to a mask under the same configuration, a slightly wider shield significantly improved the performance. The ability of a shield worn by an infected person in order to protect others in his vicinity was also investigated. A shield, and alternatively, a surgical mask, were placed on the cough simulator, while the breathing simulator remained totally exposed. In both cases, no droplets or particles were found in the vicinity of the breathing simulator.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis research was funded by Israeli MODAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:this research involves no human subjectsAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesData is be available upon request