Medical masks vs N95 respirators for preventing COVID‐19 in healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized trials

Abstract

Background: Respiratory protective devices are critical in protecting against infection in healthcare workers at high risk of novel 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19); however, recommendations are conflicting and epidemiological data on their relative effectiveness against COVID-19 are limited. Purpose: To compare medical masks to N95 respirators in preventing laboratoryconfirmed viral infection and respiratory illness including coronavirus specifically in healthcare workers. Study Selection: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the protective effect of medical masks to N95 respirators in healthcare workers. Data Extraction: Reviewer pair independently screened, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence.Data Synthesis: Four RCTs were meta-analyzed adjusting for clustering. Compared with N95 respirators; the use of medical masks did not increase laboratory-confirmed viral (including coronaviruses) respiratory infection (OR 1.06; 95% CI 0.90-1.25; I 2 = 0%; low certainty in the evidence) or clinical respiratory illness (OR 1.49; 95% CI: 0.98-2.28; I 2 = 78%; very low certainty in the evidence). Only one trial evaluated coronaviruses separately and found no difference between the two groups (P = .49). Limitations: Indirectness and imprecision of available evidence.Conclusions: Low certainty evidence suggests that medical masks and N95 respirators offer similar protection against viral respiratory infection including coronavirus in healthcare workers during non-aerosol-generating care. Preservation of N95 S U PP O RTI N G I N FO R M ATI O N Additional supporting information may be found online in the Supporting Information section. How to cite this article: Bartoszko JJ, Farooqi MAM, Alhazzani W, Loeb M. Medical masks vs N95 respirators for preventing COVID-19 in healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Influenza Other Respi Viruses. 2020;00:1-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/ irv.12745

COVID-19 : caractéristiques cliniques, biologiques et radiologiques chez l’adulte, la femme enceinte et l’enfant. Une mise au point au cœur de la pandémie

“…Les [27]. Enfin, une métaanalyse récente ne retrouvait pas de différence de protection entre le port de masque chirurgical et le port de masque N95, suggérant une transmission essentiellement de type gouttelette, mais cette étude repose encore sur un nombre limité de travaux [28].…”

Triaging of Respiratory Protective Equipment on the assumed risk of SARS-CoV-2 aerosol exposure in patient-facing healthcare workers delivering secondary care: a rapid review

“…An additional similar systematic review was discovered. 20 This did not contain primary data so was not included, but is discussed as a similar study.…”

FFP2-mondmasker of chirurgisch mondkapje bij COVID-19

“…2 We behandelen deze trial van Radonovich hier, alsmede twee recente systematische literatuuronderzoeken waarin de trial werd geïncludeerd. [2][3][4] De RCT werd uitgevoerd in diverse settings waaronder huisartsenpraktijken, tandheelkundige klinieken en eerstehulpafdelingen. Deelnemers kregen de instructie om het toegewezen masker te dragen gedurende een jaarlijkse periode van twaalf weken waarin de kans op infectie het hoogst was.…”

“…Tot eenzelfde conclusie komen de meta-analyses van Long en Bartoszko, die zowel de RCT van Radonovich als eerdere onderzoeken meenamen in hun analyse. 3,4 In de meta-analyse van Long…”