Abstract
Rationale Inhalation of ambient SARS-CoV-2-containing bioaerosols leads to infection and pandemic airborne transmission in susceptible populations. Filter-based respirators effectively reduce exposure but complicate normal respiration through breathing zone pressure differential and are therefore impractical for long-term use.
Objectives We tested the comparative effectiveness of a prototyped micronized electrostatic precipitator (mEP) to a filter-based respirator (N95) in the removal of viral bioaerosols from a simulated inspired air stream.
Methods Each respirator was tested within a 16-liter environmental chamber housed within a Class III biological safety cabinet within biosafety level 3 containment. SARS-CoV-2 containing bioaerosols were generated into the chamber, drawn by vacuum through each respirator, and physical particle removal and viral genomic RNA were measured distal to the breathing zone of each device.
Measurement and Main Results The mEP respirator removed particles (96.5±0.4%) approximating efficiencies of the N95 (96.9±0.6%). The mEP respirator similarly decreased SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA (99.792%) when compared to N95 removal (99.942%) as a function of particle removal from the airstream distal to the breathing zone of each respirator.
Conclusions The mEP respirator approximated performance of a filter-based N95 respirator for particle removal and viral RNA as a constituent of the SARS-CoV-2 bioaerosols generated for this evaluation. In practice, the mEP respirator would provide equivalent protection from ambient infectious bioaerosols as the N95 respirator without undue pressure drop to the wearer, thereby facilitating long-term use in an unobstructed breathing configuration.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. Dr. Roy is principal investigator and Tulane University the recepeint of sponsored research funding from Henley Ion, Inc. expressly for research and development activites. Dr. Henley is a paid employee of Henley Ion, Inc. Mr. Hager is an employee of Phase Three Product Development, a contractor to Henley Ion, Inc.
Funding Statement
This study was supported, in part, by Henley Ion, Inc. and and also supported, in part, by Grant OD011104 from the Office of Research Infrastructure Programs, Office of the Director, NIH.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript
