Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorToomey, E
dc.contributor.authorConway, Y
dc.contributor.authorBurton, C
dc.contributor.authorSmith, S
dc.contributor.authorSmalle, M
dc.contributor.authorChan, Xhs
dc.contributor.authorAdisesh, A
dc.contributor.authorTanveer, S
dc.contributor.authorRoss, L
dc.contributor.authorThomson, I
dc.contributor.authorDevane, D
dc.contributor.authorGreenhalgh, T
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-23T16:45:00Z
dc.date.available2020-10-23T16:45:00Z
dc.date.issued2020-10-08
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10713/13921
dc.description.abstractBackground: Shortages of personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic has led to the extended use or re-use of single-use respirators and surgical masks by frontline healthcare workers. The evidence base underpinning such practices warrants examination. Objectives: To synthesise current guidance and systematic review evidence on extended use, reuse, or reprocessing of single-use surgical masks or filtering facepiece respirators. Data sources: World Health Organization, European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Public Health England websites to identify guidance. Medline, Pubmed, Epistemonikos, Cochrane Database and preprint servers for systematic reviews. Methods: Two reviewers conducted screening and data extraction. Quality of included systematic reviews was appraised using AMSTAR-2. Findings were narratively synthesised. Results: Six guidance documents were identified. Levels of detail and consistency across documents varied. Four high-quality systematic reviews were included: three focused on reprocessing (decontamination) of N95 respirators, one on reprocessing of surgical masks. Vaporised hydrogen peroxide and ultraviolet germicidal irradiation were highlighted as the most promising reprocessing methods, but evidence on the relative efficacy and safety of different methods was limited. We found no well-established methods for reprocessing respirators at scale. Conclusions: There is limited evidence on the impact of extended use and re-use of surgical masks and respirators and gaps and inconsistencies exist in current guidance. Where extended use or reuse is being practiced, healthcare organisations should ensure that policies and systems are in place to ensure these practices are carried out safely and in line with available guidance.en_US
dc.description.urihttps://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2020.1243en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherCambridge University Pressen_US
dc.relation.ispartofInfection control and hospital epidemiologyen_US
dc.subjectCOVID-19en_US
dc.subjectSARS-CoV-2en_US
dc.subjectfacemasksen_US
dc.subjectpandemicen_US
dc.subjectpersonal protective equipmenten_US
dc.titleExtended use or re-use of single-use surgical masks and filtering facepiece respirators during COVID-19: A rapid systematic reviewen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/ice.2020.1243
dc.identifier.pmid33028441
dc.source.beginpage1
dc.source.endpage25
dc.source.countryUnited States


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record