用于预防呼吸道感染的口罩和呼吸器:科学现状综述。

IF 19 1区 医学 Q1 MICROBIOLOGY
Clinical Microbiology Reviews Pub Date : 2024-06-13 Epub Date: 2024-05-22 DOI:10.1128/cmr.00124-23
Trisha Greenhalgh, C Raina MacIntyre, Michael G Baker, Shovon Bhattacharjee, Abrar A Chughtai, David Fisman, Mohana Kunasekaran, Amanda Kvalsvig, Deborah Lupton, Matt Oliver, Essa Tawfiq, Mark Ungrin, Joe Vipond
{"title":"用于预防呼吸道感染的口罩和呼吸器:科学现状综述。","authors":"Trisha Greenhalgh, C Raina MacIntyre, Michael G Baker, Shovon Bhattacharjee, Abrar A Chughtai, David Fisman, Mohana Kunasekaran, Amanda Kvalsvig, Deborah Lupton, Matt Oliver, Essa Tawfiq, Mark Ungrin, Joe Vipond","doi":"10.1128/cmr.00124-23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>SUMMARYThis narrative review and meta-analysis summarizes a broad evidence base on the benefits-and also the practicalities, disbenefits, harms and personal, sociocultural and environmental impacts-of masks and masking. Our synthesis of evidence from over 100 published reviews and selected primary studies, including re-analyzing contested meta-analyses of key clinical trials, produced seven key findings. First, there is strong and consistent evidence for airborne transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and other respiratory pathogens. Second, masks are, if correctly and consistently worn, effective in reducing transmission of respiratory diseases and show a dose-response effect. Third, respirators are significantly more effective than medical or cloth masks. Fourth, mask mandates are, overall, effective in reducing community transmission of respiratory pathogens. Fifth, masks are important sociocultural symbols; non-adherence to masking is sometimes linked to political and ideological beliefs and to widely circulated mis- or disinformation. Sixth, while there is much evidence that masks are not generally harmful to the general population, masking may be relatively contraindicated in individuals with certain medical conditions, who may require exemption. Furthermore, certain groups (notably D/deaf people) are disadvantaged when others are masked. Finally, there are risks to the environment from single-use masks and respirators. We propose an agenda for future research, including improved characterization of the situations in which masking should be recommended or mandated; attention to comfort and acceptability; generalized and disability-focused communication support in settings where masks are worn; and development and testing of novel materials and designs for improved filtration, breathability, and environmental impact.</p>","PeriodicalId":10378,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Microbiology Reviews","volume":" ","pages":"e0012423"},"PeriodicalIF":19.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11326136/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Masks and respirators for prevention of respiratory infections: a state of the science review.\",\"authors\":\"Trisha Greenhalgh, C Raina MacIntyre, Michael G Baker, Shovon Bhattacharjee, Abrar A Chughtai, David Fisman, Mohana Kunasekaran, Amanda Kvalsvig, Deborah Lupton, Matt Oliver, Essa Tawfiq, Mark Ungrin, Joe Vipond\",\"doi\":\"10.1128/cmr.00124-23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>SUMMARYThis narrative review and meta-analysis summarizes a broad evidence base on the benefits-and also the practicalities, disbenefits, harms and personal, sociocultural and environmental impacts-of masks and masking. Our synthesis of evidence from over 100 published reviews and selected primary studies, including re-analyzing contested meta-analyses of key clinical trials, produced seven key findings. First, there is strong and consistent evidence for airborne transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and other respiratory pathogens. Second, masks are, if correctly and consistently worn, effective in reducing transmission of respiratory diseases and show a dose-response effect. Third, respirators are significantly more effective than medical or cloth masks. Fourth, mask mandates are, overall, effective in reducing community transmission of respiratory pathogens. Fifth, masks are important sociocultural symbols; non-adherence to masking is sometimes linked to political and ideological beliefs and to widely circulated mis- or disinformation. Sixth, while there is much evidence that masks are not generally harmful to the general population, masking may be relatively contraindicated in individuals with certain medical conditions, who may require exemption. Furthermore, certain groups (notably D/deaf people) are disadvantaged when others are masked. Finally, there are risks to the environment from single-use masks and respirators. We propose an agenda for future research, including improved characterization of the situations in which masking should be recommended or mandated; attention to comfort and acceptability; generalized and disability-focused communication support in settings where masks are worn; and development and testing of novel materials and designs for improved filtration, breathability, and environmental impact.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10378,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Microbiology Reviews\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e0012423\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":19.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11326136/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Microbiology Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1128/cmr.00124-23\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Microbiology Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1128/cmr.00124-23","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要 这篇叙述性综述和荟萃分析总结了有关口罩和遮蔽的益处、实用性、不利之处、危害以及个人、社会文化和环境影响的广泛证据基础。我们对 100 多篇已发表的综述和精选的主要研究报告中的证据进行了综合分析,包括对有争议的主要临床试验的元分析进行了重新分析,得出了七项重要发现。首先,有确凿一致的证据表明严重急性呼吸系统综合症冠状病毒 2(SARS-CoV-2)和其他呼吸道病原体通过空气传播。第二,如果正确并坚持佩戴口罩,可有效减少呼吸道疾病的传播,并显示出剂量反应效应。第三,呼吸器比医用或布制口罩有效得多。第四,总体而言,规定佩戴口罩能有效减少呼吸道病原体在社区的传播。第五,口罩是重要的社会文化象征;不遵守口罩规定有时与政治和意识形态信仰以及广泛传播的错误或虚假信息有关。第六,虽然有许多证据表明口罩一般不会对普通人造成伤害,但对于患有某些疾病的人来说,口罩可能是相对禁忌的,他们可能需要豁免。此外,某些群体(特别是聋哑人)在其他人戴面具时会处于不利地位。最后,一次性口罩和呼吸器会对环境造成危害。我们提出了未来的研究议程,包括改进建议或强制佩戴口罩情况的特征;关注舒适度和可接受性;在佩戴口罩的环境中提供普遍的和以残疾人为重点的交流支持;以及开发和测试新型材料和设计,以改进过滤性、透气性和对环境的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Masks and respirators for prevention of respiratory infections: a state of the science review.

SUMMARYThis narrative review and meta-analysis summarizes a broad evidence base on the benefits-and also the practicalities, disbenefits, harms and personal, sociocultural and environmental impacts-of masks and masking. Our synthesis of evidence from over 100 published reviews and selected primary studies, including re-analyzing contested meta-analyses of key clinical trials, produced seven key findings. First, there is strong and consistent evidence for airborne transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and other respiratory pathogens. Second, masks are, if correctly and consistently worn, effective in reducing transmission of respiratory diseases and show a dose-response effect. Third, respirators are significantly more effective than medical or cloth masks. Fourth, mask mandates are, overall, effective in reducing community transmission of respiratory pathogens. Fifth, masks are important sociocultural symbols; non-adherence to masking is sometimes linked to political and ideological beliefs and to widely circulated mis- or disinformation. Sixth, while there is much evidence that masks are not generally harmful to the general population, masking may be relatively contraindicated in individuals with certain medical conditions, who may require exemption. Furthermore, certain groups (notably D/deaf people) are disadvantaged when others are masked. Finally, there are risks to the environment from single-use masks and respirators. We propose an agenda for future research, including improved characterization of the situations in which masking should be recommended or mandated; attention to comfort and acceptability; generalized and disability-focused communication support in settings where masks are worn; and development and testing of novel materials and designs for improved filtration, breathability, and environmental impact.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Microbiology Reviews
Clinical Microbiology Reviews 医学-微生物学
CiteScore
54.20
自引率
0.50%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Clinical Microbiology Reviews (CMR) is a journal that primarily focuses on clinical microbiology and immunology.It aims to provide readers with up-to-date information on the latest developments in these fields.CMR also presents the current state of knowledge in clinical microbiology and immunology.Additionally, the journal offers balanced and thought-provoking perspectives on controversial issues in these areas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信