Pan, JinHarb, CharbelLeng, WeinanMarr, Linsey C.2020-11-232020-11-232020-11-20http://hdl.handle.net/10919/100918We evaluated the effectiveness of 11 face coverings for material filtration efficiency, inward protection efficiency on a manikin, and outward protection efficiency on a manikin. At the most penetrating particle size, the vacuum bag, microfiber cloth, and surgical mask had material filtration efficiencies >50%, while the other materials had much lower filtration efficiencies. However, these efficiencies increased rapidly with particle size, and many materials had efficiencies >50% at 2 μm and >75% at 5 μm. The vacuum bag performed best, with efficiencies of 54-96% for all three metrics, depending on particle size. The thin acrylic and face shield performed worst. Inward protection efficiency and outward protection efficiency were similar for many masks; the two efficiencies diverged for stiffer materials and those worn more loosely (e.g., bandana) or more tightly (e.g., wrapped around the head) compared to a standard earloop mask. Discrepancies between material filtration efficiency and inward/outward protection efficiency indicated that the fit of the mask was important. We calculated that the particle size most likely to deposit in the respiratory tract when wearing a mask is ∼2 μm. Based on these findings, we recommend a three-layer mask consisting of outer layers of a flexible, tightly woven fabric and an inner layer consisting of a material designed to filter out particles. This combination should produce an overall efficiency of >70% at the most penetrating particle size and >90% for particles 1 μm and larger if the mask fits well.application/pdfenCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 InternationalmasksaerosoltransmissionCOVID-19SARS-CoV-2face coveringsInward and outward effectiveness of cloth masks, a surgical mask, and a face shieldArticlehttps://doi.org/10.1101/2020.11.18.20233353