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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bakhit, Mina, Krzyzaniak, Natalia, Scott, Anna Mae, Clark, Justin, Glasziou, Paul, Del Mar, Chris
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