Blood gas levels, cardiovascular strain and cognitive performance during surgical mask and filtering face piece application

Investigating effects of FFP2 wearing during physical activity on gas exchange, metabolism and affective state using a randomized controlled trial

Concerns are repeatedly raised about possible adverse respiratory effects of wearing filtering face pieces (FFP) during physical activity. This study compared the impact of FFP type 2 (NF95) on pulmonary function, blood gas values, metabolism and discomfort during light, moderate and vigorous physical activity. Healthy adults (n = 13; 6 females, 7 males; mean 31.3, SD 5.5 years) participated in this randomized two-armed (Ergometer cycling with a FFP type 2 vs. no mask) crossover trial. Baseline cardiopulmonary exercise testing and two interventions (masked and unmasked ergometer cycling 40%, 50% and 70% VO2max, 10 min each) were separated by 48 h washout periods. Spiroergometric data (End tidal carbon dioxide partial pressure PetCO2; breathing frequency; inspiration time), blood gas analysis outcomes (capillary carbon dioxide partial pressure, pCO2) and subjective response (Breathing effort and perceived exertion) were contrasted between conditions using ANOVAs. All participants completed the crossover trial, seven started with the FFP2 condition (No adverse events or side effects). FFP2 decreased breathing frequency, prolonged inspiration time, increased perceived breathing effort and PetCO2 (p < .05). Blood pCO2 in millimetres mercury increased during exercise with 50%VO2max (mean 36.67, SD 3.19 vs. mean 38.46, SD 2.57; p < .05) and 70%VO2max (35.04, 2.84 vs. 38.17, 3.43; p < .05) but not during exercise with 40%VO2max (36.55, 2.73 vs. 38.70). Perceived exertion was not affected (p > 0.05) by mask wearing. Conclusion: Mask-induced breathing resistance decreased respiratory performance and limited pulmonary gas exchange. While FFP2 affected subjective breathing effort per se, invasive diagnostics showed that statistically significant metabolic effects are induced from moderate intensity upwards. Trial registration: DRKS-ID: DRKS00030181, Date of registration: 05/09/2022 (German Register for Clinical Trials).

Health effects of filtering facepiece respirators: Research and clinical implications of comfort, thermal, skin, psychologic, and workplace effects

Filtering facepiece respirators (FFR's) such as N95s have become widely used in appropriate settings for personal respiratory protection and are increasingly used beyond workplace settings. Concerns about possible adverse effects have appeared in many publications, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic led to much more widespread use. This paper synthesizes known effects based upon review of publications in PubMed since 1995, addressing effects other than pulmonary and cardiovascular (reviewed elsewhere). Findings: (1) Subjective discomfort is very frequently reported; this includes general discomfort or organ-system-specific complaints such as respiratory, headache, dermatologic, and heat. Research methods are widely divergent, and we propose a taxonomy to classify such studies by methodology, study population (subjects, experimental vs. observational methodology, comparator, specificity, and timeframe) to facilitate synthesis. (2) Objective measures of increased heat and humidity within the mask are well documented. (3) Frequency and characteristics of dermatologic effects have been insufficiently evaluated. (4) Physical mask designs are varied, making generalizations challenging. (5) More studies of impact on work performance and communication are needed. (6) Studies of effect of FFR design and accompanying training materials on ease and consistency of use are needed.

Surgical masks and filtering facepiece class 2 respirators (FFP2) have no major physiological effects at rest and during moderate exercise at 3000-m altitude: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of face masks has been recommended or enforced in several situations; however, their effects on physiological parameters and cognitive performance at high altitude are unknown.

METHODS

Eight healthy participants (four females) rested and exercised (cycling, 1 W/kg) while wearing no mask, a surgical mask or a filtering facepiece class 2 respirator (FFP2), both in normoxia and hypobaric hypoxia corresponding to an altitude of 3000 m. Arterialised oxygen saturation (SaO2), partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) and carbon dioxide (PaCO2), heart and respiratory rate, pulse oximetry (SpO2), cerebral oxygenation, visual analogue scales for dyspnoea and mask's discomfort were systematically investigated. Resting cognitive performance and exercising tympanic temperature were also assessed.

RESULTS

Mask use had a significant effect on PaCO2 (overall +1.2 ± 1.7 mmHg). There was no effect of mask use on all other investigated parameters except for dyspnoea and discomfort, which were highest with FFP2. Both masks were associated with a similar non-significant decrease in SaO2 during exercise in normoxia (-0.5 ± 0.4%) and, especially, in hypobaric hypoxia (-1.8 ± 1.5%), with similar trends for PaO2 and SpO2.

CONCLUSIONS

Although mask use was associated with higher rates of dyspnoea, it had no clinically relevant impact on gas exchange at 3000 m at rest and during moderate exercise, and no detectable effect on resting cognitive performance. Wearing a surgical mask or an FFP2 can be considered safe for healthy people living, working or spending their leisure time in mountains, high-altitude cities or other hypobaric environments (e.g. aircrafts) up to an altitude of 3000 m.

Capillary carbon dioxide tension increases in hospital staff wearing filtering facepiece masks: a prospective crossover study

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed worldwide hygiene practices. In particular, the use of filtering face piece (FFP) masks markedly increased. Concerns have been raised regarding possible negative respiratory effects of wearing FFP masks. The aim of this study was to investigate gas exchange and subjective breathing effort in hospital personnel wearing FFP2 or FFP3 masks.

Methods

In this prospective, single-centre, crossover study, 200 hospital workers were assigned to alternately wear FFP2 or FFP3 masks for 1 h during routine activities. Capillary blood gas analysis was performed to evaluate gas exchange while wearing the FFP masks. The primary end-point was the change in capillary partial pressure of carbon dioxide (P_cCO2). In addition, capillary partial pressure of oxygen (P_cO2), respiratory rate and subjective breathing effort were assessed at the end of each hour. Changes between time points and study groups were estimated using univariate and multivariate models.

Results

P_cCO2 increased from 36.8±3.5 to 37.2±3.3 mmHg (p=0.047) and 37.4±3.2 mmHg (p=0.003) in individuals wearing FFP2 or FFP3 masks, respectively. Age (p=0.021) and male sex (p<0.001) were significantly associated with increased P_cCO2. Similarly, the P_cO2 increased from 70.7±8.4 to 73.4±8.8 mmHg (p<0.001) and 72.8±8.5 mmHg (p=0.004) in individuals wearing FFP2 or FFP3 masks, respectively. Respiratory rate and subjective breathing effort increased significantly while wearing FFP2 and FFP3 masks (p<0.001 for all analyses). The order of wearing FFP2 or FFP3 masks did not significantly affect the results.

Conclusions

An hour of wearing FFP2 or FFP3 masks increased P_cCO2 values, respiratory rate and subjective breathing effort in healthcare personnel performing routine activities.

Influence of face masks on the subjective impairment at different physical workloads

To quantify the subjective and cognitive impairment caused by wearing face masks at work, 20 men and 20 women (median age 47 years, range 19-65) were tested under different ergometer workloads while wearing surgical mask, community mask, FFP2 respirator or no mask in a randomized and partially double-blinded design. Masks were worn also at the workplace for four hours. Subjective impairment was recorded by questionnaires. Cognitive performance was tested before and after the workplace examination. Subjective feeling of heat, humidity, and difficult breathing increased with rising physical exertion and wearing time for all three mask types, most notably for FFP2. Even when blinded, participants with FFP2 reported difficult breathing already at rest. During physical exertion, individuals with low tolerance to discomfort reported significantly stronger impairment (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02-1.27). Regarding light work, older subjects (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.98) and women (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.99) showed significantly lower and atopic subjects stronger impairment (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06-1.27). No significant influence of mask wearing was detected on cognitive performance. Wearing a mask had no effect on cognitive performance, but led to discomfort which increased with physical exertion and wearing time. Individuals who tolerate discomfort poorly felt more impaired by wearing a mask during physical exertion.

Effects of wearing different face masks on cardiopulmonary performance at rest and exercise in a partially double-blinded randomized cross-over study

The use of face masks became mandatory during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Wearing masks may lead to complaints about laboured breathing and stress. The influence of different masks on cardiopulmonary performance was investigated in a partially double-blinded randomized cross-over design. Forty subjects (19-65 years) underwent body plethysmography, ergometry, cardiopulmonary exercise test and a 4-h wearing period without a mask, with a surgical mask (SM), a community mask (CM), and an FFP2 respirator (FFP2). Cardiopulmonary, physical, capnometric, and blood gas related parameters were recorded. Breathing resistance and work of breathing were significantly increased while wearing a mask. During exercise the increase in minute ventilation tended to be lower and breathing time was significantly longer with mask than without mask. Wearing a mask caused significant minimal decreases in blood oxygen pressure, oxygen saturation, an initial increase in blood and inspiratory carbon dioxide pressure, and a higher perceived physical exertion and temperature and humidity behind the mask under very heavy exercise. All effects were stronger when wearing an FFP2. Wearing face masks at rest and under exercise, changed breathing patterns in the sense of physiological compensation without representing a health risk. Wearing a mask for 4-h during light work had no effect on blood gases.

Effect of facemask use on cognitive function during a maximal running aerobic fitness test

Background: The aim of the present randomized, crossover study was to determine the physiological and cognitive function responses while wearing a facemask during a maximal running aerobic fitness test.

Methods: Fourteen healthy, nonsmoking physical education students (age = 17.5 years, height = 1.72 m, body mass = 70.4 kg) volunteered to participate in this study. They carried out a 20 m multistage fitness test (MSFT) while wearing or not a cloth facemask on two separate occasions performed in random order. The “Rating of Perceived Exertion” (RPE) and the d2 test for visual attention were administered and assessed before and immediately after the MSFT for both conditions (with or without a facemask).

Results: When wearing the facemask, the participants exhibited lower maximal aerobic speed (p = 0.039), VO_2max (p = 0.039), distance covered during the MSFT (p = 0.057), and concentration performance (p < 0.001), when compared with the control situation (without facemask). Moreover, they made more errors compared with the control condition (p = 0.021). The use of a cloth facemask during maximal endurance running tests (such as the MSFT) reduced VO_2max, and measures of cognitive performance as assessed by the test of focused visual attention (the d2 test). This data suggests avoiding using a cloth facemask during maximal aerobic fitness tests, and before any tasks that require a high level of visual attention.