| Literature DB >> 33869593 |
Mohammad Ibrahim Khalil1, Gouri Rani Banik2, Sarab Mansoor3, Amani S Alqahtani4, Harunor Rashid5.
Abstract
The exact risk association of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) for surgeons is not quantified which may be affected by their risk of exposure and individual factors. The objective of this review is to quantify the risk of COVID-19 among surgeons, and explore whether facemask can minimise the risk of COVID-19 among surgeons. A systematised review was carried out by searching MEDLINE to locate items on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 or COVID-19 in relation to health care workers (HCWs) especially those work in surgical specialities including surgical nurses and intensivists. Additionally, systematic reviews that assessed the effectiveness of facemask against viral respiratory infections, including COVID-19, among HCWs were identified. Data from identified articles were abstracted, synthesised and summarised. Fourteen primary studies that provided data on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection or experience among surgeons and 11 systematic reviews that provided evidence of the effectiveness of facemask (and other personal protective equipment) were summarised. Although the risk of COVID-19 could not be quantified precisely among surgeons, about 14% of HCWs including surgeons had COVID-19, there could be variations depending on settings. Facemask was found to be somewhat protective against COVID-19, but the HCWs' compliance was highly variable ranging from zero to 100%. Echoing surgical societies' guidelines we continue to recommend facemask use among surgeons to prevent COVID-19. ©The Author(s) 2021. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Health care worker; Personal protective equipment; SARS-CoV-2; Surgeon; Surgical mask
Year: 2021 PMID: 33869593 PMCID: PMC8026839 DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v9.i10.2170
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Clin Cases ISSN: 2307-8960 Impact factor: 1.337
Primary studies that reported coronavirus disease 2019 among surgeons
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Hunter | United Kingdom | Hospital | 1654 | Mean 41.7 | NR | NR | RT-PCR | Combined nose and throat swabs | Of 1654 HCWs tested, SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 240 (14%) | |
| Jella | United States | National data pool | 4099 | All were aged ≥ 60 | NR | NR | NR | NR | For the top most states affected by COVID-19, elderly orthopaedic surgeons aged ≥ 60 years comprised up to 48% | |
| Chow | United States, Washington | Phone interview of HCWs with COVID-19 | 48 | Median 43 (range 22-79) | 11:37 | 23 (49.7) | Not specified | NR | Among 48 HCWs with COVID-19 interviewed, 31 (64.6%) worked a median of 2 (range: 1-10) d while being symptomatic | Facemask use by HCWs might prevent transmission from asymptomatic cases |
| Liu | China | University hospital | 30 | 21-59 | 10:20 | NR | RT-PCR | NR | Of all 30 COVID-19 cases, 8 did not wear masks and 6 others wore irregularly | |
| Hughes | United States | CDC data pool | 571,708 with occupational status known | 41 (IQR: 30–53) | 79:21 | 17,838 (44%) had at least one comorbidity | Not specified | NR | Of 571,708 100,570 (22%) were HCWs. Nursing and residential care facilities were the commonest job settings | |
| Jella | United States | National data pool | Not mentioned | All were aged ≥ 60 | NR | NR | NR | NR | In the 10 states with the highest number of COVID-19 cases older neurosurgical workforce (≥ 60) accounted for 20.6%-38.9% | |
| Ruthberg | United States | National data pool | 9578 | All were aged >60 | NR | NR | NR | NR | Of all, 3081 were (32.2%) ENT surgeons aged > 60 years; the proportion by state ranged from 25.9% to 58.8% | |
| Durante-Mangoni | Italy | Regional hospital | 4 (details were known for only 3) | 25-61 (of 3 cases) | 2:1 (no details about the 4th case) | NR | RT-PCR | Nasal/or pharyngeal swab | Four nurses infected. No transmission between HCWs wearing surgical masks and inpatients | Masks were beneficial |
| Jørstad | Norway | Regional hospital | 6 | NR | NR | NR | Not specified | NR | Five ophthalmic surgeons and a ward nurse had COVID-19 | |
| Ducournau | 37 countries (34) | Questionnaire survey | 47 | NR | NR | NR | Not applicable | NR | 42 of 47 (89.4%) wore surgical mask, 12 of 47 (25.5%) wore N95 mask, 32 of 47 (68.1%) wore goggles | This study is about the compliance of surgeons with PPE |
| Canova | Switzerl | Contact racing | 21 | Median 40 (range 18–62) yr | 7:14 | NR | RT-PCR | Nasopharyngeal swab | None wore a face mask | None were positive for virus |
| Guo | Wuhan, China | Hospital | 24 cases (and 48 controls) | 36.1 (25-48) | 23:1 | 1 (4.2%) had a comorbidity | RT-PCR and antibody tests | NR | Only 7 (29.2%) wore a facemask or respirator. Wearing respirator or mask all the time was protective (OR: 0.15, 95%CI: 0.04-0.55) | Orthopaedic surgeons are at risk of COVID-19 and masks are beneficial |
| Chan | Honkong, China | University hospital | 14 (10 nurses and 4 other staff) | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | Fourteen neurosurgery staff contracted COVID-19 following exposure to a patient | Full PPE should be worn during high risk procedures |
| Ng | Singapore | University hospital | 41 HCWs exposed to an index patient | NR | NR | NR | RT-PCR | Nasopharyngeal swab | None of the exposed HCWs were RT-PCR positive; 85% wore a surgicalmask, and the rest wore N95 masks | Possibly masks and other standard measures are beneficial |
CDC: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (United States); 95%CI: 95% confidence interval; ENT: Ear, nose and throat (surgeons); HCW: Health care worker; IQR: Interquartile range; NR: Not recorded; OR: Odds ratio; PPE: Personal protective equipment; RT-PCR: Reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction.
Summary of systematic reviews that provided data on the role of facemask use against respiratory viral infection among health care workers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Jessop | Surgeons | PPE including FFP2/3 and simple surgical masks | Nil | Protection using FFP2/3 respirators is reported to last up to 8 h, whereas protection is to last about 30 min for fluid-repellent masks | Narrative synthesis |
| Samaranayake | Dentists | PPE: masks and respirators | Nil | Wearing layered, face-fitting masks/respirators and protective-eyewear can limit the spread of infection among HCWs; combined interventions such as a face mask and a face shield are better than individual ones | Mostly on HCWs in general, not just dentists |
| Aggarwal | Community dwellers | Facemask and hand washing | Nil | There was no significant reduction in ILI either with facemask alone (pooled effect size: −0.17; [CI95%−0.43–0.10]) or facemask with hand wash (pooled effect size −0.09; [CI95%−0.58 to 0.40]) | |
| Liang | Diverse participants including HCWs | Facemask | Nil | Use of masks by HCWs can reduce the risk of respiratory virus infection by 80% (OR: 0.20 (95%CI: −0.11–0.37)] | |
| Marson | Surgeons | Facemask | Nil | The pooled effect of not wearing facemasks was a risk factor for infection RR: 0.77 (95%CI: 0.62-0.97), a case-control study demonstrated an OR of 3.34 (95%CI: 1.94-5.74) if facemasks were not worn by implant surgeons | The use of facemasks by implant surgeons may be beneficial |
| Sharma | All settings including health care settings | Cloth facemask | Medical grade masks | Cloth facemasks show minimum efficacy in source control than the medical grade mask. The efficacy of cloth face masks filtration varies and depends on material type, and other factors | |
| Santos | All settings including health care settings | Cloth facemask | Surgical masks and respirators | Cloth masks presented a considerably lower protection factor [1.9 (95%CI: 1.5-2.3)]; surgical and cloth masks reduced the total number of microbes expelled when coughing wearing a mask, while another study found that neither cloth nor surgical masks effectively filtered the virus expelled through coughing | Cloth masks are not recommendedfor HCWs |
| MacIntyre and Chughtai[ | Community, HCWs and sick patients | Face masks | Respirators | RCTs in HCWs showed that respirators, if worn continually during a shift, were effective but not if worn intermittently. Medical masks were not effective, and cloth masks even less effective | |
| Chu | Health-care and non-health-care settings | Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection | N95 | Face mask use could result in reduction in risk of infection [aOR: 0.15 (95%CI: 0.07-0.34), RD: -14.3% (95%CI: -15.9 to -10.7)], with stronger association with N95 compared to surgical masks ( | Low certainty of evidence |
| Bartoszko | HCWs | Medical masks | N95 | Compared with N95 respirators, the use of medical masks did not increase laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infection [OR: 1.06 (95%CI: 0.90-1.25)]. Only one trial evaluated coronaviruses separately and found no difference between the two groups ( | Low certainty of evidence but only RCTs are included |
| Chou | Health-care and community settings | Surgical, N95, andcloth | N95 or no mask | In health care settings, observational studies found that risk for infection with SARS-CoV-1 probably decreased with mask use and possibly decreased more with N95 mask use. RCTs found, N95 and surgical masks were probably associated with similar risks for ILI and laboratory-confirmed viral infection | Evidence on effectiveness of facemask is stronger in health care than communitysettings |
aOR: Adjusted odds ratio; 95%CI: 95% confidence interval; HCW: Health care worker; ILI: Influenza-like illness; OR: Odds ratio; PPE: Personal protective equipment; RCTs: Randomised controlled trial; RD: Risk difference.
Figure 1Schematic diagram showing how personal protective equipment use by health care workers may prevent secondary transmission of coronavirus disease 2019.