Skip to content
naulon

No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 21, 2026.

Effectiveness of N95 Respirator Decontamination and Reuse against SARS-CoV-2 Virus

Robert J. Fischer, Dylan H. Morris, Neeltje van Doremalen and 11 more

Emerging Infectious Diseases · 2020

doi:10.1101/2020.04.11.20062018

Abstract

His research interests include global health, epidemiology, and vaccine-preventable diseases.

Full text

From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 21, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.

Dear editor,

The unprecedented pandemic of COVID-19 has created worldwide shortages of personal protective equipment, in particular respiratory protection such as N95 respirators. SARS-CoV-2 transmission is frequently occurring in hospital settings, with numerous reported cases of nosocomial transmission highlighting the vulnerability of healthcare workers. The environmental stability of SARS-CoV-2 underscores the need for rapid and effective decontamination methods. In general, N95 respirators are designed for single use prior to disposal. Extensive literature is available for decontamination procedures for N95 respirators, using either bacterial spore inactivation tests, bacteria or respiratory viruses (e.g. influenza A virus). Effective inactivation methods for these pathogens and surrogates include UV, ethylene oxide, vaporized hydrogen peroxide (VHP), gamma irradiation, ozone and dry heat. The filtration efficiency and N95 respirator fit has typically been less well explored, but suggest that both filtration efficiency and N95 respirator fit can be affected by the decontamination method used. For a complete list of references see supplemental information.

Here, we analyzed four different decontamination methods – UV radiation (260 – 285 nm), 70°C dry heat, 70% ethanol and vaporized hydrogen peroxide (VHP) – for their ability to reduce contamination with infectious SARS-CoV-2 and their effect on N95 respirator function. For each of the decontamination methods, we compared the normal inactivation rate of SARS-CoV-2 on N95 filter fabric to that on stainless steel, and we used quantitative fit testing to measure the filtration performance of the N95 respirators after each decontamination run and 2 hours of wear, for three consecutive decontamination and wear sessions (see supplemental information). VHP and ethanol yielded extremely rapid inactivation both on N95 and on stainless steel (Figure 1A). UV inactivated SARS-CoV-2 rapidly from steel but more slowly on N95 fabric, likely due its porous nature. Heat caused more rapid inactivation on N95 than on steel; inactivation rates on N95 were comparable to UV.

Quantitative fit tests showed that the filtration performance of the N95 respirator was not markedly reduced after a single decontamination for any of the four decontamination methods (Figure 1B). Subsequent rounds of decontamination caused sharp drops in filtration performance of the ethanol-treated masks, and to a slightly lesser degree, the heat-treated masks. The VHP and UV treated masks retained comparable filtration performance to the control group after two rounds of decontamination, and maintained acceptable performance after three rounds.

Taken together, our findings show that VHP treatment exhibits the best combination of rapid inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 and preservation of N95 respirator integrity, under the experimental conditions used here (Figure 1C). UV radiation kills the virus more slowly and preserves comparable respirator function. 70°C dry heat kills with similar speed to UV and is likely to maintain acceptable fit scores for two rounds of decontamination. Ethanol decontamination is not recommended due to loss of N95 integrity, echoing earlier findings5.

All treatments, particularly UV and dry heat, should be conducted for long enough to ensure that a sufficient reduction in virus concentration has been achieved. The degree of required reduction will depend upon the degree of initial virus contamination. Policymakers can use our estimated decay rates together with estimates of real-world contamination to choose appropriate treatment durations (see supplemental information).

Our results indicate that N95 respirators can be decontaminated and re-used in times of shortage for up to three times for UV and HPV, and up to two times for dry heat. However, utmost care should be given to ensure the proper functioning of the N95 respirator after each decontamination using readily available qualitative fit testing tools and to ensure that treatments are carried out for sufficient time to achieve desired risk-reduction. It will therefore be critical that FDA, CDC and OSHA guidelines with regards to fit testing, seal check and respirator re-use are followed.

References 10

  1. 1.

    Ranney ML, Griffeth V, Jha AK. Critical Supply Shortages - The Need for Ventilators and Personal Protective Equipment during the Covid-19 Pandemic. N Engl J Med. 2020 3 25.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmp2006141

  2. 2.

    McMichael TM, Currie DW, Clark S, Pogosjans S, Kay M, Schwartz NG, Epidemiology of Covid-19 in a Long-Term Care Facility in King County, Washington. N Engl J Med. 2020 3 27.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa2005412

  3. 3.

    Batelle. Final Report for the Bioquell Hydrogen Peroxide Vapor (HPV) Decontamination for Reuse of N95 Respirators. 2016 [cited; Available from: https://www.fda.gov/media/136386/download

    Not in our library

  4. 4.

    Fisher EM, Shaffer RE. A method to determine the available UV-C dose for the decontamination of filtering facepiece respirators. J Appl Microbiol. 2011 1;110(1):287–95.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1365-2672.2010.04881.x

  5. 5.

    Heimbuch BK, Wallace WH, Kinney K, Lumley AE, Wu CY, Woo MH, A pandemic influenza preparedness study: use of energetic methods to decontaminate filtering facepiece respirators contaminated with H1N1 aerosols and droplets. Am J Infect Control. 2011 2;39(1):e1–9.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ajic.2010.07.004

  6. 6.

    Lin TH, Tang FC, Hung PC, Hua ZC, Lai CY. Relative survival of Bacillus subtilis spores loaded on filtering facepiece respirators after five decontamination methods. Indoor Air. 2018 5 31.

    Not in our library10.1111/ina.12475

  7. 7.

    Avilash Cramer ET, Sherryl H Yu, Mitchell Galanek, Edward Lamere, Ju Li, Rajiv Gupta, Short Michael P. disposable N95 masks pass qualitative fit-test but have decreases filtration efficiency after cobalt-60 gamma irradiation. MedRxiv.

    Not in our library

  8. 8.
  9. 9.

    (NIOSH) TNIfOSaH. Decontamination and Reuse of Filtering Facepiece Respirators. 2020 [cited 2020 4/5/2020]; Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/ppe-strategy/decontamination-reuse-respirators.html

    Not in our library

  10. 10.

    CDC. Recommended Guidance for Extended Use and Limited Reuse of N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators in Healthcare Settings. 2020 [cited; Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/hcwcontrols/recommendedguidanceextuse.html

    Not in our library

Cited by papers we hold 6

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.