Table 2. FF comparison by wearing methods.

Kinds of mask		General fitting	Tight fitting	P value
A (n = 30)
	User-seal-check FF	4 [3, 9]	28 [8, 168]	< 0.001
	Real-time max FF	7 [4, 14]	87 [19, 200]	< 0.001
	Total FF	4 [3, 8]	27 [8, 83]	< 0.001
	Passing rate, n (%)	1 (3)	4 (13)	0.250
B (n = 30)
	User-seal-check FF	53 [24, 118]	200 [85, 200]	< 0.001
	Real-time max FF	102 [46, 200]	200 [200, 200]	< 0.001
	Total FF	39 [21, 69]	125 [67, 189]	< 0.001
	Passing rate, n (%)	4 (13)	18 (60)	< 0.001
C (n = 30)
	User-seal-check FF	3 [2, 4]	10 [5, 58]	< 0.001
	Real-time max FF	4 [3, 8]	18 [8, 200]	< 0.001
	Total FF	3 [2, 5]	9 [5, 23]	< 0.001
	Passing rate, n (%)	1 (3)	3 (10)	0.472
Totala (n = 90)
	User-seal-check FF	5 [3, 32]	46 [8, 200]	< 0.001
	Real-time max FF	12 [4, 72]	141 [19, 200]	< 0.001
	Total FF	6 [3, 23]	29 [9, 116]	< 0.001
	Passing rate, n (%)	6 (7)	25 (28)	< 0.001

Data are presented as median with interquartile range [IQR] or number (%). P value was adjusted P value by Bonferroni's correction.

A = horizontal 3-fold mask, B = horizontal 3-fold mask with adjustable ear-loops length, C = vertical 2-fold mask, FF = fit factor.

^aIt was an analysis including all types of masks, its types were adjusted.