Yijun Lu , Arnold Ikedichi Okpani , Christopher B. McLeod , Jennifer M. Grant , Annalee Yassi
{"title":"Masking strategy to protect healthcare workers from COVID-19: An umbrella meta-analysis","authors":"Yijun Lu , Arnold Ikedichi Okpani , Christopher B. McLeod , Jennifer M. Grant , Annalee Yassi","doi":"10.1016/j.idh.2023.01.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The burden of severe disease and death due to SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic among healthcare workers (HCWs) worldwide has been substantial. Masking is a critical control measure to effectively protect HCWs from respiratory infectious diseases, yet for COVID-19, masking policies have varied considerably across jurisdictions. As Omicron variants began to be predominant, the value of switching from a permissive approach based on a point of care risk assessment (PCRA) to a rigid masking policy needed to be assessed.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE (Ovid platform), Cochrane Library, Web of Science (Ovid platform), and PubMed to June 2022. An umbrella review of meta-analyses investigating protective effects of N95 or equivalent respirators and medical masks was then conducted. Data extraction, evidence synthesis and appraisal were duplicated.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>While the results of Forest plots slightly favoured N95 or equivalent respirators over medical masks, eight of the ten meta-analyses included in the umbrella review were appraised as having very low certainty and the other two as having low certainty.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The literature appraisal, in conjunction with risk assessment of the Omicron variant, side-effects and acceptability to HCWs, along with the precautionary principle, supported maintaining the current policy guided by PCRA rather than adopting a more rigid approach. Well-designed prospective multi-centre trials, with systematic attention to the diversity of healthcare settings, risk levels and equity concerns are needed to support future masking policies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45006,"journal":{"name":"Infection Disease & Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9932689/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection Disease & Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S246804512300010X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Background
The burden of severe disease and death due to SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic among healthcare workers (HCWs) worldwide has been substantial. Masking is a critical control measure to effectively protect HCWs from respiratory infectious diseases, yet for COVID-19, masking policies have varied considerably across jurisdictions. As Omicron variants began to be predominant, the value of switching from a permissive approach based on a point of care risk assessment (PCRA) to a rigid masking policy needed to be assessed.
Methods
A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE (Ovid platform), Cochrane Library, Web of Science (Ovid platform), and PubMed to June 2022. An umbrella review of meta-analyses investigating protective effects of N95 or equivalent respirators and medical masks was then conducted. Data extraction, evidence synthesis and appraisal were duplicated.
Results
While the results of Forest plots slightly favoured N95 or equivalent respirators over medical masks, eight of the ten meta-analyses included in the umbrella review were appraised as having very low certainty and the other two as having low certainty.
Conclusion
The literature appraisal, in conjunction with risk assessment of the Omicron variant, side-effects and acceptability to HCWs, along with the precautionary principle, supported maintaining the current policy guided by PCRA rather than adopting a more rigid approach. Well-designed prospective multi-centre trials, with systematic attention to the diversity of healthcare settings, risk levels and equity concerns are needed to support future masking policies.
期刊介绍：
The journal aims to be a platform for the publication and dissemination of knowledge in the area of infection and disease causing infection in humans. The journal is quarterly and publishes research, reviews, concise communications, commentary and other articles concerned with infection and disease affecting the health of an individual, organisation or population. The original and important articles in the journal investigate, report or discuss infection prevention and control; clinical, social, epidemiological or public health aspects of infectious disease; policy and planning for the control of infections; zoonoses; and vaccination related to disease in human health. Infection, Disease & Health provides a platform for the publication and dissemination of original knowledge at the nexus of the areas infection, Disease and health in a One Health context. One Health recognizes that the health of people is connected to the health of animals and the environment. One Health encourages and advances the collaborative efforts of multiple disciplines-working locally, nationally, and globally-to achieve the best health for people, animals, and our environment. This approach is fundamental because 6 out of every 10 infectious diseases in humans are zoonotic, or spread from animals. We would be expected to report or discuss infection prevention and control; clinical, social, epidemiological or public health aspects of infectious disease; policy and planning for the control of infections; zoonosis; and vaccination related to disease in human health. The Journal seeks to bring together knowledge from all specialties involved in infection research and clinical practice, and present the best work in this ever-changing field. The audience of the journal includes researchers, clinicians, health workers and public policy professionals concerned with infection, disease and health.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
