...
首页> 外文期刊>South African medical journal = >Rapid review of the effects of cloth and medical masks for preventing transmission of SARS-C6V-2 in community and household settings
【24h】

Rapid review of the effects of cloth and medical masks for preventing transmission of SARS-C6V-2 in community and household settings

机译:快速审查布料和医用面罩的影响,防止社区和家庭环境中SARS-C6V-2传输

获取原文

摘要

BACKGROUND: Evidence on mask use in the general population is needed to inform SARS-CoV-2 responsesOBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of cloth and medical masks for preventing SARS-CoV-2 transmission in community settingsMETHODS: Two rapid reviews were conducted searching three electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library) and two clinical trials registries on 30 and 31 March 2020RESULTS: We screened 821 records and assessed nine full-text articles for eligibility. One and seven RCTs were included for cloth and medical mask reviews, respectively. No SARS-CoV-2-specific RCTs and no cloth mask RCTs in community settings were identified. A single hospital-based RCT provided indirect evidence that, compared with medical masks, cloth masks probably increase clinical respiratory illnesses (relative risk (RR) 1.56; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98 - 2.49) and laboratory-confirmed respiratory virus infections (RR 1.54; 95% CI 0.88 - 2.70). Evidence for influenza-like illnesses (ILI) was uncertain (RR 13.00; 95% CI 1.69 - 100.03). Two RCTs provide low-certainty evidence that medical masks may make little to no difference to ILI infection risk versus no masks (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.81 - 1.19) in the community setting. Five RCTs provide low-certainty evidence that medical masks may slightly reduce infection risk v. no masks (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.55 - 1.20) in the household settingCONCLUSIONS: Direct evidence for cloth and medical mask efficacy and effectiveness in the community is limited. Decision-making for mask use may consider other factors such as feasibility and SARS-CoV-2 transmission dynamics; however, well-designed comparative effectiveness studies are required.
机译:背景:需要在普通人口中使用掩码的证据来告知SARS-COV-2响应,以评估布料和医疗面具的有效性,以防止SARS-COV-2在社区设置中的传播方法:进行两次迅速评论,搜索三个电子数据库(PubMed,Embase,Cochrane图书馆)和两个临床试验在2020年3月30日和31日的注册管理机构:我们筛选了821条记录并评估了九条资格的全文文章。布和医疗面具评论分别包含一七个RCT。没有SARS-COV-2特定的RCT和没有社区设置中的布掩模RCT。基于医院的RCT提供了间接证据,与医用面具相比,布面具可能增加临床呼吸疾病(相对风险(RR)1.56; 95%置信区间(CI)0.98 - 2.49)和实验室证实呼吸道病毒感染( RR 1.54; 95%CI 0.88 - 2.70)。流感样疾病(ILI)的证据不确定(RR 13.00; 95%CI 1.69 - 100.03)。两个RCT提供低确定性证据,即医疗面具可能对ILI感染风险的影响几乎没有差异,而没有面具(RR 0.98; 95%CI 0.81 - 1.19)。五个RCT提供低确定性证据,医疗面具可能略微减少感染风险v。家庭设施中没有面具(RR 0.81; 95%CI 0.55 - 1.20):广告和医疗面具的直接证据有限。掩模使用的决策可能会考虑其他因素,如可行性和SARS-COV-2传输动态;然而,需要精心设计的比较效果研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号