Cargando…
Downsides of face masks and possible mitigation strategies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
OBJECTIVE: To identify, appraise and synthesise studies evaluating the downsides of wearing face masks in any setting. We also discuss potential strategies to mitigate these downsides. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL and EuropePMC were searched (inc...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7903088/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33619199 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044364 |
_version_ | 1783654668299141120 |
---|---|
author | Bakhit, Mina Krzyzaniak, Natalia Scott, Anna Mae Clark, Justin Glasziou, Paul Del Mar, Chris |
author_facet | Bakhit, Mina Krzyzaniak, Natalia Scott, Anna Mae Clark, Justin Glasziou, Paul Del Mar, Chris |
author_sort | Bakhit, Mina |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To identify, appraise and synthesise studies evaluating the downsides of wearing face masks in any setting. We also discuss potential strategies to mitigate these downsides. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL and EuropePMC were searched (inception–18 May 2020), and clinical registries were searched via CENTRAL. We also did a forward–backward citation search of the included studies. INCLUSION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials and observational studies comparing face mask use to any active intervention or to control. DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: Two author pairs independently screened articles for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the quality of included studies. The primary outcomes were compliance, discomforts, harms and adverse events of wearing face masks. RESULTS: We screened 5471 articles, including 37 (40 references); 11 were meta-analysed. For mask wear adherence, 47% (95% CI 25% to 68%, p<0.0001), more people wore face masks in the face mask group compared with control; adherence was significantly higher (26%, 95% CI 8% to 46%, p<0.01) in the surgical/medical mask group than in N95/P2 group. The largest number of studies reported on the discomfort and irritation outcome (20 studies); fewest reported on the misuse of masks, and none reported on mask contamination or risk compensation behaviour. Risk of bias was generally high for blinding of participants and personnel and low for attrition and reporting biases. CONCLUSIONS: There are insufficient data to quantify all of the adverse effects that might reduce the acceptability, adherence and effectiveness of face masks. New research on face masks should assess and report the harms and downsides. Urgent research is also needed on methods and designs to mitigate the downsides of face mask wearing, particularly the assessment of possible alternatives. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework website https://osf.io/sa6kf/ (timestamp 20-05-2020). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7903088 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79030882021-03-09 Downsides of face masks and possible mitigation strategies: a systematic review and meta-analysis Bakhit, Mina Krzyzaniak, Natalia Scott, Anna Mae Clark, Justin Glasziou, Paul Del Mar, Chris BMJ Open Infectious Diseases OBJECTIVE: To identify, appraise and synthesise studies evaluating the downsides of wearing face masks in any setting. We also discuss potential strategies to mitigate these downsides. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL and EuropePMC were searched (inception–18 May 2020), and clinical registries were searched via CENTRAL. We also did a forward–backward citation search of the included studies. INCLUSION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials and observational studies comparing face mask use to any active intervention or to control. DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: Two author pairs independently screened articles for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the quality of included studies. The primary outcomes were compliance, discomforts, harms and adverse events of wearing face masks. RESULTS: We screened 5471 articles, including 37 (40 references); 11 were meta-analysed. For mask wear adherence, 47% (95% CI 25% to 68%, p<0.0001), more people wore face masks in the face mask group compared with control; adherence was significantly higher (26%, 95% CI 8% to 46%, p<0.01) in the surgical/medical mask group than in N95/P2 group. The largest number of studies reported on the discomfort and irritation outcome (20 studies); fewest reported on the misuse of masks, and none reported on mask contamination or risk compensation behaviour. Risk of bias was generally high for blinding of participants and personnel and low for attrition and reporting biases. CONCLUSIONS: There are insufficient data to quantify all of the adverse effects that might reduce the acceptability, adherence and effectiveness of face masks. New research on face masks should assess and report the harms and downsides. Urgent research is also needed on methods and designs to mitigate the downsides of face mask wearing, particularly the assessment of possible alternatives. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework website https://osf.io/sa6kf/ (timestamp 20-05-2020). BMJ Publishing Group 2021-02-22 /pmc/articles/PMC7903088/ /pubmed/33619199 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044364 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. 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/ 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 | Infectious Diseases Bakhit, Mina Krzyzaniak, Natalia Scott, Anna Mae Clark, Justin Glasziou, Paul Del Mar, Chris Downsides of face masks and possible mitigation strategies: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Downsides of face masks and possible mitigation strategies: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Downsides of face masks and possible mitigation strategies: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Downsides of face masks and possible mitigation strategies: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Downsides of face masks and possible mitigation strategies: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Downsides of face masks and possible mitigation strategies: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | downsides of face masks and possible mitigation strategies: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Infectious Diseases |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7903088/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33619199 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044364 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bakhitmina downsidesoffacemasksandpossiblemitigationstrategiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT krzyzaniaknatalia downsidesoffacemasksandpossiblemitigationstrategiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT scottannamae downsidesoffacemasksandpossiblemitigationstrategiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT clarkjustin downsidesoffacemasksandpossiblemitigationstrategiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT glaszioupaul downsidesoffacemasksandpossiblemitigationstrategiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT delmarchris downsidesoffacemasksandpossiblemitigationstrategiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |