Cargando…

Facial protection for healthcare workers during pandemics: a scoping review

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to personal protective equipment (PPE) shortages, requiring mask reuse or improvisation. We provide a review of medical-grade facial protection (surgical masks, N95 respirators and face shields) for healthcare workers, the safety a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Garcia Godoy, Laura R, Jones, Amy E, Anderson, Taylor N, Fisher, Cameron L, Seeley, Kylie M L, Beeson, Erynn A, Zane, Hannah K, Peterson, Jaime W, Sullivan, Peter D
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7228486/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32371574
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002553
_version_ 1783534597670174720
author Garcia Godoy, Laura R
Jones, Amy E
Anderson, Taylor N
Fisher, Cameron L
Seeley, Kylie M L
Beeson, Erynn A
Zane, Hannah K
Peterson, Jaime W
Sullivan, Peter D
author_facet Garcia Godoy, Laura R
Jones, Amy E
Anderson, Taylor N
Fisher, Cameron L
Seeley, Kylie M L
Beeson, Erynn A
Zane, Hannah K
Peterson, Jaime W
Sullivan, Peter D
author_sort Garcia Godoy, Laura R
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to personal protective equipment (PPE) shortages, requiring mask reuse or improvisation. We provide a review of medical-grade facial protection (surgical masks, N95 respirators and face shields) for healthcare workers, the safety and efficacy of decontamination methods, and the utility of alternative strategies in emergency shortages or resource-scarce settings. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of PubMed and grey literature related to facial protection and potential adaptation strategies in the setting of PPE shortages (January 2000 to March 2020). Limitations included few COVID-19-specific studies and exclusion of non-English language articles. We conducted a narrative synthesis of the evidence based on relevant healthcare settings to increase practical utility in decision-making. RESULTS: We retrieved 5462 peer-reviewed articles and 41 grey literature records. In total, we included 67 records which met inclusion criteria. Compared with surgical masks, N95 respirators perform better in laboratory testing, may provide superior protection in inpatient settings and perform equivalently in outpatient settings. Surgical mask and N95 respirator conservation strategies include extended use, reuse or decontamination, but these strategies may result in inferior protection. Limited evidence suggests that reused and improvised masks should be used when medical-grade protection is unavailable. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to critical shortages of medical-grade PPE. Alternative forms of facial protection offer inferior protection. More robust evidence is required on different types of medical-grade facial protection. As research on COVID-19 advances, investigators should continue to examine the impact on alternatives of medical-grade facial protection.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7228486
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72284862020-05-18 Facial protection for healthcare workers during pandemics: a scoping review Garcia Godoy, Laura R Jones, Amy E Anderson, Taylor N Fisher, Cameron L Seeley, Kylie M L Beeson, Erynn A Zane, Hannah K Peterson, Jaime W Sullivan, Peter D BMJ Glob Health Original Research BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to personal protective equipment (PPE) shortages, requiring mask reuse or improvisation. We provide a review of medical-grade facial protection (surgical masks, N95 respirators and face shields) for healthcare workers, the safety and efficacy of decontamination methods, and the utility of alternative strategies in emergency shortages or resource-scarce settings. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of PubMed and grey literature related to facial protection and potential adaptation strategies in the setting of PPE shortages (January 2000 to March 2020). Limitations included few COVID-19-specific studies and exclusion of non-English language articles. We conducted a narrative synthesis of the evidence based on relevant healthcare settings to increase practical utility in decision-making. RESULTS: We retrieved 5462 peer-reviewed articles and 41 grey literature records. In total, we included 67 records which met inclusion criteria. Compared with surgical masks, N95 respirators perform better in laboratory testing, may provide superior protection in inpatient settings and perform equivalently in outpatient settings. Surgical mask and N95 respirator conservation strategies include extended use, reuse or decontamination, but these strategies may result in inferior protection. Limited evidence suggests that reused and improvised masks should be used when medical-grade protection is unavailable. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to critical shortages of medical-grade PPE. Alternative forms of facial protection offer inferior protection. More robust evidence is required on different types of medical-grade facial protection. As research on COVID-19 advances, investigators should continue to examine the impact on alternatives of medical-grade facial protection. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-05-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7228486/ /pubmed/32371574 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002553 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Research
Garcia Godoy, Laura R
Jones, Amy E
Anderson, Taylor N
Fisher, Cameron L
Seeley, Kylie M L
Beeson, Erynn A
Zane, Hannah K
Peterson, Jaime W
Sullivan, Peter D
Facial protection for healthcare workers during pandemics: a scoping review
title Facial protection for healthcare workers during pandemics: a scoping review
title_full Facial protection for healthcare workers during pandemics: a scoping review
title_fullStr Facial protection for healthcare workers during pandemics: a scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Facial protection for healthcare workers during pandemics: a scoping review
title_short Facial protection for healthcare workers during pandemics: a scoping review
title_sort facial protection for healthcare workers during pandemics: a scoping review
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7228486/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32371574
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002553
work_keys_str_mv AT garciagodoylaurar facialprotectionforhealthcareworkersduringpandemicsascopingreview
AT jonesamye facialprotectionforhealthcareworkersduringpandemicsascopingreview
AT andersontaylorn facialprotectionforhealthcareworkersduringpandemicsascopingreview
AT fishercameronl facialprotectionforhealthcareworkersduringpandemicsascopingreview
AT seeleykylieml facialprotectionforhealthcareworkersduringpandemicsascopingreview
AT beesonerynna facialprotectionforhealthcareworkersduringpandemicsascopingreview
AT zanehannahk facialprotectionforhealthcareworkersduringpandemicsascopingreview
AT petersonjaimew facialprotectionforhealthcareworkersduringpandemicsascopingreview
AT sullivanpeterd facialprotectionforhealthcareworkersduringpandemicsascopingreview