sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
FREE ACCESS
Conduct of Scientific Research
Review
22 May 2024
Share on
Masks and respirators for prevention of respiratory infections: a state of the science review
Authors: Trisha Greenhalgh https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2369-8088 trish.greenhalgh@phc.ox.ac.uk, C. Raina MacIntyre https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3060-0555, Michael G. Baker https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1865-1536, Shovon Bhattacharjee https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1241-641X, Abrar A. Chughtai https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4203-7891, David Fisman https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5009-6926, Mohana Kunasekaran https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5779-7979,
SHOW ALL (13 AUTHORS), Joe Vipond https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1475-9814AUTHORS INFO & AFFILIATIONS
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/cmr.00124-23
CITE
PDF/EPUB
This narrative review and meta-analysis summarizes a broad evidence base on the benefits—and also the practicalities, disbenefits, harms and personal, sociocultural and environmental impacts—of masks and masking. Our synthesis of evidence from over 100 published reviews and selected primary studies, including re-analyzing contested meta-analyses of key clinical trials, produced seven key findings. First, there is strong and consistent evidence for airborne transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and other respiratory pathogens. Second, masks are, if correctly and consistently worn, effective in reducing transmission of respiratory diseases and show a dose-response effect. Third, respirators are significantly more effective than medical or cloth masks. Fourth, mask mandates are, overall, effective in reducing community transmission of respiratory pathogens. Fifth, masks are important sociocultural symbols; non-adherence to masking is sometimes linked to political and ideological beliefs and to widely circulated mis- or disinformation. Sixth, while there is much evidence that masks are not generally harmful to the general population, masking may be relatively contraindicated in individuals with certain medical conditions, who may require exemption. Furthermore, certain groups (notably D/deaf people) are disadvantaged when others are masked. Finally, there are risks to the environment from single-use masks and respirators. We propose an agenda for future research, including improved characterization of the situations in which masking should be recommended or mandated; attention to comfort and acceptability; generalized and disability-focused communication support in settings where masks are worn; and development and testing of novel materials and designs for improved filtration, breathability, and environmental impact.
more....
https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/cmr.00124-23
Conduct of Scientific Research
Review
22 May 2024
Share on
Masks and respirators for prevention of respiratory infections: a state of the science review
Authors: Trisha Greenhalgh https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2369-8088 trish.greenhalgh@phc.ox.ac.uk, C. Raina MacIntyre https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3060-0555, Michael G. Baker https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1865-1536, Shovon Bhattacharjee https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1241-641X, Abrar A. Chughtai https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4203-7891, David Fisman https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5009-6926, Mohana Kunasekaran https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5779-7979,
SHOW ALL (13 AUTHORS), Joe Vipond https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1475-9814AUTHORS INFO & AFFILIATIONS
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/cmr.00124-23
CITE
PDF/EPUB
- CMR
Online First- SUMMARY
- INTRODUCTION
- THE BASIC SCIENCE OF MASKING
- CLINICAL TRIALS OF MASKS AND RESPIRATORS
- NON-EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE ON EFFICACY
- ADVERSE EFFECTS AND HARMS OF MASKS
- SOCIAL AND POLITICAL ASPECTS OF MASKING
- MASKING AS POLICY
- SINGLE-USE MASKS AND RESPIRATORS: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
- SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
- REFERENCES
- Author Bios
This narrative review and meta-analysis summarizes a broad evidence base on the benefits—and also the practicalities, disbenefits, harms and personal, sociocultural and environmental impacts—of masks and masking. Our synthesis of evidence from over 100 published reviews and selected primary studies, including re-analyzing contested meta-analyses of key clinical trials, produced seven key findings. First, there is strong and consistent evidence for airborne transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and other respiratory pathogens. Second, masks are, if correctly and consistently worn, effective in reducing transmission of respiratory diseases and show a dose-response effect. Third, respirators are significantly more effective than medical or cloth masks. Fourth, mask mandates are, overall, effective in reducing community transmission of respiratory pathogens. Fifth, masks are important sociocultural symbols; non-adherence to masking is sometimes linked to political and ideological beliefs and to widely circulated mis- or disinformation. Sixth, while there is much evidence that masks are not generally harmful to the general population, masking may be relatively contraindicated in individuals with certain medical conditions, who may require exemption. Furthermore, certain groups (notably D/deaf people) are disadvantaged when others are masked. Finally, there are risks to the environment from single-use masks and respirators. We propose an agenda for future research, including improved characterization of the situations in which masking should be recommended or mandated; attention to comfort and acceptability; generalized and disability-focused communication support in settings where masks are worn; and development and testing of novel materials and designs for improved filtration, breathability, and environmental impact.
more....
https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/cmr.00124-23