Dataset Information

The Utilization of Protective Face Masks among Polish Healthcare Workers during COVID-19 Pandemic: Do We Pass the Exam?

ABSTRACT: Relevant personal protective measures during the COVID-19 pandemic include face masks, possibly decreasing the risk of infection among the general population and healthcare workers (HCW) if utilized properly. The aim of the study was to assess whether different Polish HCW utilize face masks according to the 2020 World Health Organization guidance (WHO) criteria. This cross-sectional study included 1156 respondents who participated in an internet survey evaluating mask-related behaviors. All the WHO criteria were complied with by 1.4% of participants, regardless of medical profession, specialty or place of employment. HCW mostly adhered to criterion 1 (C1; strict covering of the face and mouth with the mask; 90.8%), C4 (washing/disinfecting the hands after touching/taking off the mask; 49%) and C3 (taking off the mask properly without touching the anterior surface; 43.4%), whereas C2 (avoidance of touching the mask with hands) was complied with least commonly (6.8%). HCW with mask-induced itch (31.6%) complied to C2 less often (odds ratio 0.53; p = 0.01). The study reveals that Polish HCW rarely adhere to all the 2020 WHO guidance criteria on the use of masks, whereas the adherence to particular criteria is variable and may be associated with the presence of skin-related conditions and other factors. Better compliance with the recommendations in the future is necessary to increase personal safety of HCW and prevent the transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

SUBMITTER: Reszke R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7835780 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Utilization of Protective Face Masks among Polish Healthcare Workers during COVID-19 Pandemic: Do We Pass the Exam?

Reszke Radomir R Matusiak Łukasz Ł Krajewski Piotr K PK Szepietowska Marta M Białynicki-Birula Rafał R Szepietowski Jacek C JC

International journal of environmental research and public health 20210119 2

Relevant personal protective measures during the COVID-19 pandemic include face masks, possibly decreasing the risk of infection among the general population and healthcare workers (HCW) if utilized properly. The aim of the study was to assess whether different Polish HCW utilize face masks according to the 2020 World Health Organization guidance (WHO) criteria. This cross-sectional study included 1156 respondents who participated in an internet survey evaluating mask-related behaviors. All the ...[more]

PMID: 33478170

Similar Datasets

Project description:Many governments have instructed the population to wear simple mouse-and-nose covers or surgical face masks to protect themselves from droplet infection with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in public. However, the basic protection mechanisms and benefits of these masks remain controversial. Therefore, the aim of this work is to show from a fluid physics point of view under which circumstances these masks can protect against droplet infection. First of all, we show that the masks protect people in the surrounding area quite well, since the flow resistance of the face masks effectively prevents the spread of exhaled air, e.g. when breathing, speaking, singing, coughing and sneezing. Secondly, we provide visual evidence that typical household materials used by the population to make masks do not provide highly efficient protection against respirable particles and droplets with a diameter of 0.3-2 ?m as they pass through the materials largely unfiltered. According to our tests, only vacuum cleaner bags with fine dust filters show a comparable or even better filtering effect than commercial particle filtering FFP2/N95/KN95 half masks. Thirdly, we show that even simple mouse-and-nose covers made of good filter material cannot reliably protect against droplet infection in contaminated ambient air, since most of the air flows through gaps at the edge of the masks. Only a close-fitting, particle-filtering respirator offers good self-protection against droplet infection. Nevertheless, wearing simple homemade or surgical face masks in public is highly recommended if no particle filtrating respiratory mask is available. Firstly, because they protect against habitual contact of the face with the hands and thus serve as self-protection against contact infection. Secondly, because the flow resistance of the masks ensures that the air remains close to the head when breathing, speaking, singing, coughing and sneezing, thus protecting other people if they have sufficient distance from each other. However, if the distance rules cannot be observed and the risk of inhalation-based infection becomes high because many people in the vicinity are infectious and the air exchange rate is small, improved filtration efficiency masks are needed, to take full advantage of the three fundamental protective mechanisms these masks provide.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of cloth masks to medical masks in hospital healthcare workers (HCWs). The null hypothesis is that there is no difference between medical masks and cloth masks. SETTING:14 secondary-level/tertiary-level hospitals in Hanoi, Vietnam. PARTICIPANTS:1607 hospital HCWs aged ?18?years working full-time in selected high-risk wards. INTERVENTION:Hospital wards were randomised to: medical masks, cloth masks or a control group (usual practice, which included mask wearing). Participants used the mask on every shift for 4 consecutive weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE:Clinical respiratory illness (CRI), influenza-like illness (ILI) and laboratory-confirmed respiratory virus infection. RESULTS:The rates of all infection outcomes were highest in the cloth mask arm, with the rate of ILI statistically significantly higher in the cloth mask arm (relative risk (RR)=13.00, 95% CI 1.69 to 100.07) compared with the medical mask arm. Cloth masks also had significantly higher rates of ILI compared with the control arm. An analysis by mask use showed ILI (RR=6.64, 95% CI 1.45 to 28.65) and laboratory-confirmed virus (RR=1.72, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.94) were significantly higher in the cloth masks group compared with the medical masks group. Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%. CONCLUSIONS:This study is the first RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety. Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection. Further research is needed to inform the widespread use of cloth masks globally. However, as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be recommended for HCWs, particularly in high-risk situations, and guidelines need to be updated. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12610000887077.

Dataset Information

The Utilization of Protective Face Masks among Polish Healthcare Workers during COVID-19 Pandemic: Do We Pass the Exam?

Publications

The Utilization of Protective Face Masks among Polish Healthcare Workers during COVID-19 Pandemic: Do We Pass the Exam?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets