Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-sq2k7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-03T05:26:41.223Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Evolution of the Surgical Mask: Filtering Efficiency Versus Effectiveness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Nathan L. Belkin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

When originally introduced for use at the turn of the century, the primary function of the surgical mask was to prevent the migration of microorganisms residing in the nose and mouth of members of the operating team to the open wound of the patient. As technology developed new materials and designs, their filtering efficiencies gradually improved. However, there is no standard test method for assessing that capability, and its influence on the rates of surgical-wound infection has yet to be demonstrated. Quite to the contrary, both in-vitro and in-vivo studies indicate that a mask may not be universally necessary in today's surgical environment.

Information

Type
Readers' Forum
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , January 1997 , pp. 49 - 57
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Mikulicz, J. Das operieren in steriliserten zwirnhandschuren und mit mundbinde. Zentralbl Chir 1897;24:713–717.Google Scholar
2. Flugge, C. Uber luftinfection. Z Hyg Infektionskr 1897;25:179–224.Google Scholar
3. Hamilton, A. Dissemination of streptococci through invisible sputum. JAMA 1905;44:1100–1111.Google Scholar
4. Weaver, GH. The value of the face mask and other measures. JAMA 1918:76–78.Google Scholar
5. Huller, DA, Colwell, RC. The protective qualities of the gauze face mask. JAMA 1918;71:1213–1215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Doust, BC, Lyon, AB. Face masks in infections of the respiratory tract. JAMA 1918;71:1216–1219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Weaver, GH. Droplet infection and its prevention by the face mask. J Infect Dis 1919;24:218–230.Google Scholar
8. Kellogg, WH, MacMillan, G. An experimental study of the efficiency of gauze face masks. Am J Public Health 1920;X:34–42.Google Scholar
9. Walker, IJ. How can we determine the efficiency of surgical masks? Surg Gynecol Obstet 1930;50:266–270.Google Scholar
10. Blatt, ML, Dale, ML. A bacteriological study of the efficiency of face masks. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1933;57:363–368.Google Scholar
11. Waters, EG. Adequate surgical masking: problem and solution. Am J Surg 1936;32:474–477.Google Scholar
12. Arnold, L. A new surgical mask. Arch Surg 1938;37:1008–1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Hirshfield, JW, Laube, PJ. Surgical masks, an experimental study. Surgery 1941;9:720–730.Google Scholar
14. Kiser, JC, Hitchcock, CR. Comparative studies with a new plastic surgical mask. Surgery 1958;44:936.Google Scholar
15. Shooter, RA, Smith, MA, Hunter, CJW. A study of surgical masks. Br J Surg 1959;203:246–249.Google Scholar
16. Rockwood, CA, O'Donoghue, DH. The surgical mask: its development, usage and efficiency. Arch Surg 1960;80:963–971.Google Scholar
17. Greene, VW, Vesley, D. Method for evaluating effectiveness of surgical masks. J Bacteriol 1962;83:663–667.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18. Ford, CR, Peterson, DE. The efficiency of surgical face masks. Am J Surg Pathol 1963;106:954–957.Google ScholarPubMed
19. Nicholes, PS. Comparative evaluation of a new surgical mask medium. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1964;118:579–583.Google Scholar
20. Madsen, PO, Madsen, RE. A study of surgical masks. Am J Surg. 1967;114:431–435.Google Scholar
21. Dineen, P. Microbial filtration by surgical masks. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1971;33:812–814.Google Scholar
22. Quesnel, LB. The efficiency of surgical masks of varying design and composition. Br J Surg 1975;62:936–940.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23. Shah, M, Crompton, P, Vickers, MDA. The efficiency of face masks. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1983;65:380–381.Google Scholar
24. Vesley, D, Langholtz, AC, Lauer, JL. Clinical implications of surgical mask retention efficiency for viable and total particles. Infections in Surgery 1983:531–536.Google Scholar
25. Davis, WT. Filtration efficiency of surgical face masks: the need for meaningful standards. Am J Infect Control 1991;19:16–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26. Weber, A, Willeke, K, Marchioni, R, et al. Aerosol penetration and leakage characteristics of masks used in the healthcare industry. Am J Infect Control 1993;21:167–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Orr, NWM. Is a mask necessary in the operating theater? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1981;63:390–392.Google Scholar
28. Tunevall, TG. Postoperative wound infections and surgical face masks: a controlled study. World J Surg 1991;15:383–387.Google Scholar
29. Ritter, MA, Eitzen, H, French, ML, Hart, JB. The operating room environment as affected by people and the surgical face mask. Clin Orthop 1975;111:147–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30. Mitchell, NJ, Hunt, S. Surgical face masks in modern operating rooms—a costly and unnecessary ritual? J Hosp Infect 1991;18:238–242.Google Scholar
31. Hubble, MJ, Weale, AE, Perez, JV, Bowleer, KE, MacGowan, AP, Bannister, GC. Clothing in laminar flow operating theaters. J Hosp Infect 1996;32:1–7.Google Scholar
32. US Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Occupational exposure to bloodborne pathogens: final rule. Federal Register 12 6, 1991; 56:64177.Google Scholar
33. White, MC, Lynch, P. Blood contact and exposures among operating room personnel: a multicenter study. Am J Infect Control 1993;21:243–248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
34. Tokars, JI, Culver, DH, Mendelson, MH, et al. Skin and mucous membrane contacts with blood during surgical procedures: risk and prevention. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1995;16:703–711.Google Scholar
35. Beck, WC. The surgical mask: another ‘sacred cow’? AORN J 1992;55:955–957.Google Scholar
36. Beck, WC. The surgical mask. The Guthrie Journal 1993;62:97–98.Google Scholar
37. Meleny, FL, Stevens, FA. Postoperative haemolytic Streptococcus wound infections and their relation to haemolytic Streptococcus carriers among the operating personnel. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1926;43:338–342.Google Scholar
38. Meleny, FL. Infection in clean operative wounds: a nine-year study. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1935;60:264–275.Google Scholar
39. Koch, F. Perspectives in surgical attire. Infect Control Steril Tech 1996;2:15–17.Google Scholar