Mass-production and Distribution of Medical Face Shields Using Additive Manufacturing and Injection Molding Process for Healthcare System Support During COVID-19 Pandemic in Brazil

Abstract

Face shields have been adopted worldwide as personal protective equipment for healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. This device provides a transparent facial physical barrier reducing the exposure to aerosol particles. The fused deposition modeling (FDM) is the most applied process of additive manufacturing due to its usability and low-cost. The injection molding (IM) is the fastest process for mass production. This study is the first to perform a qualitative comparison between the use of FDM and IM processes for mass production and rapid distribution of face shields in a pandemic. The design of the face shield and tests were conducted in prototyping cycles based on requirements of medical, Brazilian standards, manufacturing, and production. The FDM face shields manufacturing was carried out by a volunteer network, and the IM manufacturing was carried out by companies. The volunteers produced 35,000 medical face shields through the FDM process with daily delivery to several hospitals. A total of 80,000 face shields was produced by the IM process and delivered to remote Brazilian regions. The mass production of 115,000 face shields protected health professionals from public hospitals in all states of Brazil. In a pandemic, both FDM and IM processes are suitable for mass production of face shields. Once a committed network of volunteers is formed in strategic regions, the FDM process promotes a fast daily production. The IM process is the best option for large scale production of face shields and delivery to remote areas where access to 3D printing is reduced.

3D-Printed Valves to Assist Noninvasive Ventilation Procedures During the Covid-19 Pandemic: A Case Study

“…However, for big batches, injection molding, for example, is economically favorable [28]. Kunkel et al [29] compared additive manufacturing and injection molding for mass production of face-shields in a preprinted work. The production capacity was 10 parts/day using fused filament fabrication additive manufacturing technique, while injection molding achieved a 2000 parts/day capacity.…”

3D‐Printing to Mitigate COVID‐19 Pandemic

“…The excess waste generated during manufacturing, and the high complexity associated with the products, makes this technique highly expensive and limits its usage especially during times of emergency. Kunkel et al, [210] put forth a comparative study between the two techniques which suggests that while conventional methods of manufacturing, like injection molding, were able to produce a large number of products through a centralized mechanism, the initiation of process took more time and was expensive. Further, the products made could not be quickly accessed by hospitals due to the disruption in supply chain because of the pandemic.…”

Scientometric Review for Research Patterns on Additive Manufacturing of Lattice Structures

“…Additionally, it illustrates the impact of several events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the global decline in the price of oil per barrel in the years 2016–2017. The authors propose that these two worldwide events have an impact on the volume of publications for additive manufacturing on lattice structures, especially COVID-19 [ 169 , 170 , 171 , 172 , 173 , 174 , 175 , 176 , 177 , 178 , 179 ]. The production of high-caliber research articles has been significantly influenced by the recent worldwide COVID-19 epidemic in 2020–2021 and national lockdowns that happened in over 80% of countries globally for many months due to the challenge of finding COVID-19 controls such as the use of 3D printed face shields [ 9 , 120 , 180 , 181 , 182 , 183 , 184 , 185 , 186 , 187 , 188 ].…”