6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Facemask use in community settings to prevent respiratory infection transmission: a rapid review and meta-analysis

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Highlights

          • Medical facemask should be used by healthy individuals for preventing respiratory infection transmission.

          • Medical facemask should be used by sick individuals for preventing respiratory infection transmission.

          • Medical facemask effectiveness is dependent on compliance.

          • Medical facemask should be used in combination with other preventive measures.

          • There is no direct evidence in humans available for the recommendation of cloth facemask use.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Synthesis of the available evidence on the effectiveness of medical and cloth facemask use by the general public in community settings is required to learn lessons for future respiratory epidemics/pandemics.

          Method

          We utilized search terms relating to facemasks, infection, and community settings on PubMed, the Cochrane Library Database, and Google Scholar. A meta-analysis was conducted utilizing a random-effects model.

          Results

          The review included 12 primary studies on the effectiveness of medical facemask use to prevent influenza, influenza-like illness, SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Our meta-analysis demonstrates that facemask use significantly reduces the risk of transmitting these respiratory infections (pooled OR = 0.66, 95% confidence interval: 0.54-0.81). Of the 12 studies, ten clinical trials suggest that respiratory infection incidence is lower with high medical facemask compliance, early use, and use in combination with intensive hand hygiene. One cohort study conducted during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, demonstrated facemasks are effective in reducing SARS-CoV-2 transmission when used before those infected develop symptoms. One case-control study reported that controls used medical facemasks more often than cases infected with SARS-CoV (p-value<0.05). No primary study on cloth facemask effectiveness to prevent respiratory infection transmission was found.

          Conclusion

          Based on the available evidence, we recommend medical facemask use by healthy and sick individuals for preventing respiratory infection transmission in community settings. Medical facemask effectiveness is dependent on compliance and utilization in combination with preventive measures such as intensive hand hygiene. Currently, no direct evidence is available in humans supporting the recommendation of cloth facemask use to prevent respiratory infection transmission.

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

          Summary Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes COVID-19 and is spread person-to-person through close contact. We aimed to investigate the effects of physical distance, face masks, and eye protection on virus transmission in health-care and non-health-care (eg, community) settings. Methods We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the optimum distance for avoiding person-to-person virus transmission and to assess the use of face masks and eye protection to prevent transmission of viruses. We obtained data for SARS-CoV-2 and the betacoronaviruses that cause severe acute respiratory syndrome, and Middle East respiratory syndrome from 21 standard WHO-specific and COVID-19-specific sources. We searched these data sources from database inception to May 3, 2020, with no restriction by language, for comparative studies and for contextual factors of acceptability, feasibility, resource use, and equity. We screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We did frequentist and Bayesian meta-analyses and random-effects meta-regressions. We rated the certainty of evidence according to Cochrane methods and the GRADE approach. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020177047. Findings Our search identified 172 observational studies across 16 countries and six continents, with no randomised controlled trials and 44 relevant comparative studies in health-care and non-health-care settings (n=25 697 patients). Transmission of viruses was lower with physical distancing of 1 m or more, compared with a distance of less than 1 m (n=10 736, pooled adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0·18, 95% CI 0·09 to 0·38; risk difference [RD] −10·2%, 95% CI −11·5 to −7·5; moderate certainty); protection was increased as distance was lengthened (change in relative risk [RR] 2·02 per m; p interaction=0·041; moderate certainty). Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection (n=2647; aOR 0·15, 95% CI 0·07 to 0·34, RD −14·3%, −15·9 to −10·7; low certainty), with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar (eg, reusable 12–16-layer cotton masks; p interaction=0·090; posterior probability >95%, low certainty). Eye protection also was associated with less infection (n=3713; aOR 0·22, 95% CI 0·12 to 0·39, RD −10·6%, 95% CI −12·5 to −7·7; low certainty). Unadjusted studies and subgroup and sensitivity analyses showed similar findings. Interpretation The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis support physical distancing of 1 m or more and provide quantitative estimates for models and contact tracing to inform policy. Optimum use of face masks, respirators, and eye protection in public and health-care settings should be informed by these findings and contextual factors. Robust randomised trials are needed to better inform the evidence for these interventions, but this systematic appraisal of currently best available evidence might inform interim guidance. Funding World Health Organization.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Face masks for the public during the covid-19 crisis

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Reduction of secondary transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in households by face mask use, disinfection and social distancing: a cohort study in Beijing, China

              Introduction Transmission of COVID-19 within families and close contacts accounts for the majority of epidemic growth. Community mask wearing, hand washing and social distancing are thought to be effective but there is little evidence to inform or support community members on COVID-19 risk reduction within families. Methods A retrospective cohort study of 335 people in 124 families and with at least one laboratory confirmed COVID-19 case was conducted from 28 February to 27 March 2020, in Beijing, China. The outcome of interest was secondary transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) within the family. Characteristics and practices of primary cases, of well family contacts and household hygiene practices were analysed as predictors of secondary transmission. Results The secondary attack rate in families was 23.0% (77/335). Face mask use by the primary case and family contacts before the primary case developed symptoms was 79% effective in reducing transmission (OR=0.21, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.79). Daily use of chlorine or ethanol based disinfectant in households was 77% effective (OR=0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.84). Wearing a mask after illness onset of the primary case was not significantly protective. The risk of household transmission was 18 times higher with frequent daily close contact with the primary case (OR=18.26, 95% CI 3.93 to 84.79), and four times higher if the primary case had diarrhoea (OR=4.10, 95% CI 1.08 to 15.60). Household crowding was not significant. Conclusion The study confirms the highest risk of transmission prior to symptom onset, and provides the first evidence of the effectiveness of mask use, disinfection and social distancing in preventing COVID-19. We also found evidence of faecal transmission. This can inform guidelines for community prevention in settings of intense COVID-19 epidemics.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Infect Dis
                Int. J. Infect. Dis
                International Journal of Infectious Diseases
                Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases.
                1201-9712
                1878-3511
                26 September 2020
                26 September 2020
                Affiliations
                [0005]Institute for Population Health, Weill Cornell Medicine, Qatar
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author at: Institute for Population Health, Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, PO Box: 24144, Doha, Qatar.
                Article
                S1201-9712(20)32150-0
                10.1016/j.ijid.2020.09.1434
                7518963
                32987183
                880d36cd-4f77-499b-8f2f-18a9f4f4c6c7
                © 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 13 August 2020
                : 17 September 2020
                : 22 September 2020
                Categories
                Review

                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                facemask,community setting,household
                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                facemask, community setting, household

                Comments

                Comment on this article