The Totobobo mask is one of the few reusable respirators whose performance has been examined in independent, peer-reviewed research rather than rested on marketing claims alone.
Below are three studies conducted at Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, alongside an air-pollution study from Queen Mary University of London (QMUL). Each link leads to the original publication.
Study 01
A randomised controlled pilot study comparing the filtration factor of a non-fit-tested HEPA filtering facemask with a fit-tested N95 mask
Au SS, Gomersall CD, Leung P, Li PT. Journal of Hospital Infection, 2010; 76(1):23–25.
Key findingCut to fit but not fit-tested, the Totobobo mask reduced airborne particles about 135-fold, and 73% of wearers reached an adequate filtration factor (≥100) — promising performance, though not a substitute for a fit-tested N95.
Read on Journal of Hospital Infection
Study 02
Performance of a novel non-fit-tested HEPA filtering face mask
Hui CYT, Leung CCH, Gomersall CD. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 2017; 38(10):1260–1261.
Key findingThe heat-moldable Totobobo mask achieved a median filtration factor comparable to previously fit-tested N95 respirators (84.5 vs 77.5; p=0.98) — without requiring fit-testing.
Read on Cambridge Core
Study 03
The effect of ethanol immersion on fit performance and comfort of a fit-tested reusable mask
Li KHK, Yeung DCM, Ling L. Journal of Industrial Textiles, 2022; Vol. 52.
Key findingFit performance and comfort showed no significant drop after up to 15 cleaning cycles with 70% ethanol, with 20 of 22 participants rating the Totobobo mask more comfortable than commercial N95 masks.
Read on SAGE Journals
Study 04
Can masks protect you from air pollution?
Liu NM, Wan T, Russell-Jones EC, Grigg J. Thorax (BMJ), 2017; 72(Suppl 3):A162. Conference abstract.
Key findingTested against four other masks on busy London roadsides, the Totobobo mask was the most effective, cutting inhaled black carbon (diesel soot) by roughly 71%.
Read on Thorax (BMJ)
