Face masks for preventing respiratory infections in the community: A systematic review

Author:

Saijonkari Maija,Booth Neill,Isojärvi Jaana,Finnilä Jenni,Mäkelä MarjukkaORCID

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe Ministry of Social Affairs and Health in Finland commissioned this systematic literature review on the effectiveness and safety of using face masks in public environments in protecting against upper respiratory tract infections, to inform policy. Previous reviews have not clearly distinguished the context of mask use.MethodsThe review was completed within two weeks, adhering to the PRISMA guidelines where possible. The review looks at the effect of face coverings (surgical masks or cloth coverings, excluding FFP2 and FFP3 masks) in protecting against the transmission in droplet-mediated respiratory tract infections. Our review includes controlled trials or previous systematic reviews of mask use by the general public in public spaces, outside homes and healthcare facilities.ResultsThe systematic literature search identified five randomized trials. Use of masks prevented infections in one subgroup of one pilot study, so the effect of face masks on the transmission of infections outside the home appears small or nonexistent. Five of the eight systematic reviews showed no evidence of face masks being helpful in controlling the spread of respiratory infection or preventing exposure in healthy individuals. Meta-analyses often combined very heterogeneous studies and costs were not reported in any studies.ConclusionsRandomized studies on the effect of face coverings in the general population are few. The reported effect of masks used outside the home on transmission of droplet-mediated respiratory infections in the population is minimal or non-existent. It is difficult to distinguish the potential effect of masks from the effects of other protective measures.Summary boxWhat is already known on this subject?Previous reviews on the effectiveness and safety of use of face masks in protecting against upper respiratory tract infections have not clearly distinguished the context of mask use. They have combined very heterogeneous studies done in homes, health care settings, or public environments.What does this study add?Our systematic review on the use of face masks in public environments, done to inform an impending policy decision, found five randomized trials (RCTs) and eight reviews. Use of masks prevented infections in one subgroup of one RCT, so the effect of face masks appears small or nonexistent.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference29 articles.

1. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement;The PRISMA Group;BMJ,2009

2. Use of cloth masks in the practice of infection control - evidence and policy gaps;Int J Infect Control,2013

3. Howard J , Huang A , Li Z , Tufekci Z , Zdimal V , van der Westhuizen H , et al. Face masks against COVID- 19: an evidence review. PNAS. 2020 (in print).

4. World Health Organization. Non-pharmaceutical public health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza: annex: report of systematic literature reviews. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019. Available at: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/329438/9789241516839-eng.pdf

5. World Health Organization. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Available at: https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3