Background The first detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in Germany was reported in early February 2020. In addition, extensive control measures on the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have been placed in Germany since March 2020. These include contact and travel restrictions, distance rules, mandatory wearing of face masks and respirators, cancellation of mass events, closures of day-care centers, schools, restaurants and shops, isolation measures, and intensified infection control measures in medical and long-term care facilities. Changes in demand or access to health care services and intensified control measures can lead to changes in transmission dynamics and imply effects on the overall occurrence of infectious diseases in hospitals. Methods To analyze the impact of infection control measures implemented in public on infectious diseases in hospitals, surveillance data from Marburg University Hospital were analyzed retrospectively. The analysis was conducted from January 2019 to June 2021, referred to hospital occupancy and mobility data in the county of Marburg-Biedenkopf, and correlated to control measures in hospitals and the general population. Results The COVID-19 pandemic and associated measures immediately impacted the occurrence of infectious diseases at the Marburg University Hospital. Significant changes were detected for virus-associated respiratory and gastrointestinal diseases. The massive drop in norovirus infections was significantly affected by the onset of the pandemic (P = 0.028). Similar effects were observed for rotavirus (up to − 89%), respiratory syncytial virus (up to − 98%), and adenovirus infections (up to − 90%). The decrease in gastrointestinal and respiratory virus detection rates was significantly affected by the decline in mobility (P < 0.05). Of note, since April 2020, there have been no detected influenza cases. Furthermore, Clostridioides difficile-related infections declined after late 2020 (− 44%). In contrast, no significant changes were detected in the prevalence of susceptible and drug-resistant bacterial pathogens. In particular, the detection rates of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates or multidrug resistant (MDR) and extended drug resistant (XDR) bacteria remained constant, although the consumption of hand disinfectants and protective equipment increased. Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic and associated public health measures had a significant impact on infectious diseases and the detection of pathogens at the Marburg University Hospital. Significant changes were observed for community transmissible infections, while no such effects on pathogens primarily associated with nosocomial transmission could be detected.

Background: The first detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in Germany was reported in early February 2020. In addition, extensive control measures on the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have been placed in Germany since March 2020. These include contact and travel restrictions, distance rules, mandatory wearing of face masks and respirators, cancellation of mass events, closures of day-care centers, schools, restaurants and shops, isolation measures, and intensified infection control measures in medical and long-term care facilities. Changes in demand or access to health care services and intensified control measures can lead to changes in transmission dynamics and imply effects on the overall occurrence of infectious diseases in hospitals.Methods: To analyze the impact of infection control measures implemented in public on infectious diseases in hospitals, surveillance data from Marburg University Hospital were analyzed retrospectively. The analysis was conducted from January 2019 to June 2021, referred to hospital occupancy and mobility data in the county of Marburg-Biedenkopf, and correlated to control measures in hospitals and the general population.Results: The COVID-19 pandemic and associated measures immediately impacted the occurrence of infectious diseases at the Marburg University Hospital. Significant changes were detected for virus-associated respiratory and gastrointestinal diseases. The massive drop in norovirus infections was significantly affected by the onset of the pandemic (P = 0.028). Similar effects were observed for rotavirus (up to -89%), respiratory syncytial virus (up to -98%), and adenovirus infections (up to -90%). The decrease in gastrointestinal and respiratory virus detection rates was significantly affected by the decline in mobility (P < 0.05). Of note, since April 2020, there have been no detected influenza cases. Furthermore, Clostridioides difficile-related infections declined after late 2020 (- 44%). In contrast, no significant changes were detected in the prevalence of susceptible and drug-resistant bacterial pathogens. In particular, the detection rates of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates or multidrug resistant (MDR) and extended drug resistant (XDR) bacteria remained constant, although the consumption of hand disinfectants and protective equipment increased.Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic and associated public health measures had a significant impact on infectious diseases and the detection of pathogens at the Marburg University Hospital. Significant changes were observed for community transmissible infections, while no such effects on pathogens primarily associated with nosocomial transmission could be detected.

Face masks and respirators are commonly used to prevent the transmission of infectious diseases that spread by respiratory droplets and aerosols. However, there is still uncertainty about the protective effect of the different types of masks against virus containing aerosols. To determine the as-worn bioaerosol protection efficacy of different face coverings and estimate the possible protective function against airborne diseases, we challenged different respirators and medical masks on a standardized dummy head with a bioaerosol containing MS2 bacteriophages as virus surrogates. In our experiments, FFP2 respirators showed the highest filtration efficacy 94 ± 4 (SD) % followed by medical masks 93 ± 3 (SD) % and KN95 respirators 90 ± 7 (SD) %. Nevertheless, we found no statistically significant difference between respirators and medical masks in terms of provided protection against infective aerosols. Our findings indicate that both respirators and medical masks provide a high as-worn bioaerosol protection efficacy against virus containing aerosols, and therefore, a very high protection against airborne diseases. Considering the higher comfort, better availability, and lower price of medical masks in contrast to respirators, it is recommendable to use medical face masks especially in low risk situations and in general public.

Face masks and respirators are commonly used to prevent the transmission of infectious diseases that spread by respiratory droplets and aerosols. However, there is still uncertainty about the protective effect of the different types of masks against virus containing aerosols. To determine the as-worn bioprotection efficacy of different face coverings and estimate the possible protective function against airborne diseases, we challenged different respirators and medical masks on a standardized dummy head with a bioaerosol containing MS2 bacteriophages as virus surrogates. In our experiments, FFP2 respirators showed the highest filtration efficacy 94.45±4.47 (SD) % followed by medical masks 92.83±3.34 (SD) % and KN95 respirators 90.08±6.64% (SD) %. Nevertheless, we found no statistically significant difference between respirators and medical masks in terms of provided protection against infective aerosols. Our findings indicate, that both respirators and medical masks provide a high as-worn bioprotection efficacy against virus containing aerosols, and therefore, a very high protection against airborne diseases. Considering the higher comfort, better availability, and lower price of medical masks in contrast to respirators, it is recommendable to use medical face masks especially in low risk situations and in general public.