Comparison of face mask and exercise research
| Authors | Design and mask | Number of participants | Age of participants | Test protocol | Results |
| Driver et al | Randomised crossover design: cloth face mask, no mask | N=31 (14 women, 17 men) | Mage=23.2±3.1 years | Incremental CPET using a Bruce treadmill protocol | Impaired participant performance in key performance variables (ie, reduced exercise time), physiological variables (eg, VO2max, VE, HR, SpO2) and perceptual variables (ie, RPE, dyspnoea). |
| Li et al9 | Randomised: surgical, N95 | N=10 (5 women, 5 men) | Mage=28.0±6 years | Intermittent treadmill test | HR was lower during exercise testing in the surgical mask condition. Participants rated the surgical face masks less favourably on perceived humidity, heat and breath resistance. |
| Fikenzer et al2 | Crossover design: surgical, N95, no mask | N=12 men | Mage=38.1±6.2 years | Incremental test on semirecumbent cycle ergometer | Significantly reduced ventilation, VO2max, and comfort in the conditions with surgical and N95 masks compared with no mask. |
| Epstein et al1 | Crossover design: surgical, N95, no mask | N=16 men | Mage=34±4 years | Ramped test on cycle ergometer | No significant difference in exercise time, HR, arterial blood oxygen saturation (SAO2) or blood pressure responses across conditions. End-tidal carbon dioxide level during the N95 mask condition (43 mm Hg) was significantly higher compared with surgical mask (40 mm Hg; p=0.04) and no mask (35 mm Hg; p=0.001). |
| Shaw et al3 | Randomised crossover design: surgical, cloth face mask, no mask | N=14 (7 women, 7 men) | Mage28.2±8.7 years | Maximal cycle ergometer test | No significant effect of wearing a surgical or cloth mask on exercise time, peak power, SAO2, RPE or HR. No cardiopulmonary or ventilatory data were collected under the cloth mask condition. |
CPET, cardiopulmonary exercise test; HR, heart rate; RPE, rating of perceived exertion; VE, minute ventilation; VO2max, maximal oxygen consumption.