-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2023Cystic fibrosis (CF) is an inherited life-limiting disorder. Over time persistent infection and inflammation within the lungs contribute to severe airway damage and loss... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cystic fibrosis (CF) is an inherited life-limiting disorder. Over time persistent infection and inflammation within the lungs contribute to severe airway damage and loss of respiratory function. Chest physiotherapy, or airway clearance techniques (ACTs), are integral in removing airway secretions and initiated shortly after CF diagnosis. Conventional chest physiotherapy (CCPT) generally requires assistance, while alternative ACTs can be self-administered, facilitating independence and flexibility. This is an updated review.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness (in terms of respiratory function, respiratory exacerbations, exercise capacity) and acceptability (in terms of individual preference, adherence, quality of life) of CCPT for people with CF compared to alternative ACTs.
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search was 26 June 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (including cross-over design) lasting at least seven days and comparing CCPT with alternative ACTs in people with CF.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. pulmonary function tests and 2. number of respiratory exacerbations per year. Our secondary outcomes were 3. quality of life, 4. adherence to therapy, 5. cost-benefit analysis, 6. objective change in exercise capacity, 7. additional lung function tests, 8. ventilation scanning, 9. blood oxygen levels, 10. nutritional status, 11. mortality, 12. mucus transport rate and 13. mucus wet or dry weight. We reported outcomes as short-term (seven to 20 days), medium-term (more than 20 days to up to one year) and long-term (over one year).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 21 studies (778 participants) comprising seven short-term, eight medium-term and six long-term studies. Studies were conducted in the USA (10), Canada (five), Australia (two), the UK (two), Denmark (one) and Italy (one) with a median of 23 participants per study (range 13 to 166). Participant ages ranged from newborns to 45 years; most studies only recruited children and young people. Sixteen studies reported the sex of participants (375 males; 296 females). Most studies compared modifications of CCPT with a single comparator, but two studies compared three interventions and another compared four interventions. The interventions varied in the duration of treatments, times per day and periods of comparison making meta-analysis challenging. All evidence was very low certainty. Nineteen studies reported the primary outcomes forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV)and forced vital capacity (FVC), and found no difference in change from baseline in FEV % predicted or rate of decline between groups for either measure. Most studies suggested equivalence between CCPT and alternative ACTs, including positive expiratory pressure (PEP), extrapulmonary mechanical percussion, active cycle of breathing technique (ACBT), oscillating PEP devices (O-PEP), autogenic drainage (AD) and exercise. Where single studies suggested superiority of one ACT, these findings were not corroborated in similar studies; pooled data generally concluded that effects of CCPT were comparable to those of alternative ACTs. CCPT versus PEP We are uncertain whether CCPT improves lung function or has an impact on the number of respiratory exacerbations per year compared with PEP (both very low-certainty evidence). There were no analysable data for our secondary outcomes, but many studies provided favourable narrative reports on the independence achieved with PEP mask therapy. CCPT versus extrapulmonary mechanical percussion We are uncertain whether CCPT improves lung function compared with extrapulmonary mechanical percussions (very low-certainty evidence). The annual rate of decline in average forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of FVC (FEF) was greater with high-frequency chest compression compared to CCPT in medium- to long-term studies, but there was no difference in any other outcome. CCPT versus ACBT We are uncertain whether CCPT improves lung function compared to ACBT (very low-certainty evidence). Annual decline in FEF was worse in participants using the FET component of ACBT only (mean difference (MD) 6.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 11.45; 1 study, 63 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One short-term study reported that directed coughing was as effective as CCPT for all lung function outcomes, but with no analysable data. One study found no difference in hospital admissions and days in hospital for exacerbations. CCPT versus O-PEP We are uncertain whether CCPT improves lung function compared to O-PEP devices (Flutter device and intrapulmonary percussive ventilation); however, only one study provided analysable data (very low-certainty evidence). No study reported data for number of exacerbations. There was no difference in results for number of days in hospital for an exacerbation, number of hospital admissions and number of days of intravenous antibiotics; this was also true for other secondary outcomes. CCPT versus AD We are uncertain whether CCPT improves lung function compared to AD (very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported the number of exacerbations per year; however, one study reported more hospital admissions for exacerbations in the CCPT group (MD 0.24, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.42; 33 participants). One study provided a narrative report of a preference for AD. CCPT versus exercise We are uncertain whether CCPT improves lung function compared to exercise (very low-certainty evidence). Analysis of original data from one study demonstrated a higher FEV % predicted (MD 7.05, 95% CI 3.15 to 10.95; P = 0.0004), FVC (MD 7.83, 95% CI 2.48 to 13.18; P = 0.004) and FEF (MD 7.05, 95% CI 3.15 to 10.95; P = 0.0004) in the CCPT group; however, the study reported no difference between groups (likely because the original analysis accounted for baseline differences).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We are uncertain whether CCPT has a more positive impact on respiratory function, respiratory exacerbations, individual preference, adherence, quality of life, exercise capacity and other outcomes when compared to alternative ACTs as the certainty of the evidence is very low. There was no advantage in respiratory function of CCPT over alternative ACTs, but this may reflect insufficient evidence rather than real equivalence. Narrative reports indicated that participants prefer self-administered ACTs. This review is limited by a paucity of well-designed, adequately powered, long-term studies. This review cannot yet recommend any single ACT above others; physiotherapists and people with CF may wish to try different ACTs until they find an ACT that suits them best.
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Middle Aged; Cystic Fibrosis; Drainage, Postural; Physical Therapy Modalities; Quality of Life; Respiratory Therapy
PubMed: 37144842
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002011.pub3 -
BMC Oral Health May 2023The introduction of skeletal anchorage utilized for maxillary protraction with a face mask or class III elastics has been developed for the management of class III...
The introduction of skeletal anchorage utilized for maxillary protraction with a face mask or class III elastics has been developed for the management of class III malocclusions with minimal dental effect. The objective of the present review was to evaluate the current evidence regarding airway dimensional changes following bone-anchored maxillary protraction. A search was conducted by two authors (S.A & B.A) in the following databases: MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar and Open Grey; besides a hand search in references of selected articles and developing a search alert in electronic databases. Selection criteria comprised randomized as well as prospective clinical trials evaluating airway dimensional changes following bone-anchored maxillary protraction. Relevant data were extracted after studies retrieval and selection. The risk of bias was thereafter evaluated using the revised RoB 2 tool for randomized clinical trials and the ROBINS-I tool was used for non-randomized clinical trials. The quality of studies was assessed using the modified Jadad score. After examining (eligibility) full-text articles, four clinical trials were ultimately included. These studies evaluated the airway dimensional changes, following bone-anchored maxillary protraction in comparison to different control study groups. Based on the available evidence, all the bone-anchored maxillary protraction devices used in the eligible studies in the present systematic review resulted in an improvement in the airway dimensions. However, due to the few numbers of studies available and the guarded evidence due to the low quality of evidence of three out of four included articles, there is no strong evidence to support a significant increase in the airway dimensions following bone-anchored maxillary protraction. Therefore, there is a need for more randomized controlled clinical trials with similar bone-anchored protraction devices and similar assessment methods for more valid comparisons, excluding any confounding factors, on airway dimensional changes.
Topics: Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures; Malocclusion, Angle Class III; Palatal Expansion Technique; Maxilla; Humans; Respiratory System; Cephalometry; Radiography, Dental; Male; Female
PubMed: 37138306
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-02940-0 -
BMC Public Health Apr 2023In December 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged with a high transmissibility rate and resulted in numerous negative impacts on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
In December 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged with a high transmissibility rate and resulted in numerous negative impacts on global life. Preventive measures such as face masks, social distancing, and vaccination helped control the pandemic. Nonetheless, the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants, such as Omega and Delta, as well as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) reinfection, raise additional concerns. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the overall prevalence of reinfection on global and regional scales.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted across three databases, PubMed, Scopus, and ProQuest Central, including all articles pertaining to COVID-19 reinfection without language restriction. After critical appraisal and qualitative synthesis of the identified relevant articles, a meta-analysis considering random effects was used to pool the studies.
RESULTS
We included 52 studies conducted between 2019 and 2022, with a total sample size of 3,623,655 patients. The overall prevalence of COVID-19 reinfection was 4.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.7-4.8%; n = 52), with high heterogeneity between studies. Africa had the highest prevalence of 4.7% (95% CI: 1.9-7.5%; n = 3), whereas Oceania and America had lower estimates of 0.3% (95% CI: 0.2-0.4%; n = 1) and 1% (95% CI: 0.8-1.3%; n = 7), respectively. The prevalence of reinfection in Europe and Asia was 1.2% (95% CI: 0.8-1.5%; n = 8) and 3.8% (95% CI: 3.4-4.3%; n = 43), respectively. Studies that used a combined type of specimen had the highest prevalence of 7.6% (95% CI: 5.8-9.5%; n = 15) compared with those that used oropharyngeal or nasopharyngeal swabs only that had lower estimates of 6.7% (95% CI: 4.8-8.5%; n = 8), and 3.4% (95% CI: 2.8-4.0%; n = 12) respectively.
CONCLUSION
COVID-19 reinfection occurs with varying prevalence worldwide, with the highest occurring in Africa. Therefore, preventive measures, including vaccination, should be emphasized to ensure control of the pandemic.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Prevalence; Reinfection
PubMed: 37118717
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-023-15626-7 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2023As face masks became mandatory in most countries during the COVID-19 pandemic, adverse effects require substantiated investigation. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
As face masks became mandatory in most countries during the COVID-19 pandemic, adverse effects require substantiated investigation.
METHODS
A systematic review of 2,168 studies on adverse medical mask effects yielded 54 publications for synthesis and 37 studies for meta-analysis (on = 8,641, = 2,482, = 6,159, age = 34.8 ± 12.5). The median trial duration was only 18 min (IQR = 50) for our comprehensive evaluation of mask induced physio-metabolic and clinical outcomes.
RESULTS
We found significant effects in both medical surgical and N95 masks, with a greater impact of the second. These effects included decreased SpO (overall Standard Mean Difference, SMD = -0.24, 95% CI = -0.38 to -0.11, < 0.001) and minute ventilation (SMD = -0.72, 95% CI = -0.99 to -0.46, < 0.001), simultaneous increased in blood-CO (SMD = +0.64, 95% CI = 0.31-0.96, < 0.001), heart rate (N95: SMD = +0.22, 95% CI = 0.03-0.41, = 0.02), systolic blood pressure (surgical: SMD = +0.21, 95% CI = 0.03-0.39, = 0.02), skin temperature (overall SMD = +0.80 95% CI = 0.23-1.38, = 0.006) and humidity (SMD +2.24, 95% CI = 1.32-3.17, < 0.001). Effects on exertion (overall SMD = +0.9, surgical = +0.63, N95 = +1.19), discomfort (SMD = +1.16), dyspnoea (SMD = +1.46), heat (SMD = +0.70), and humidity (SMD = +0.9) were significant in = 373 with a robust relationship to mask wearing ( < 0.006 to < 0.001). Pooled symptom prevalence ( = 8,128) was significant for: headache (62%, < 0.001), acne (38%, < 0.001), skin irritation (36%, < 0.001), dyspnoea (33%, < 0.001), heat (26%, < 0.001), itching (26%, < 0.001), voice disorder (23%, < 0.03), and dizziness (5%, = 0.01).
DISCUSSION
Masks interfered with O-uptake and CO-release and compromised respiratory compensation. Though evaluated wearing durations are shorter than daily/prolonged use, outcomes independently validate mask-induced exhaustion-syndrome (MIES) and down-stream physio-metabolic disfunctions. MIES can have long-term clinical consequences, especially for vulnerable groups. So far, several mask related symptoms may have been misinterpreted as long COVID-19 symptoms. In any case, the possible MIES contrasts with the WHO definition of health.
CONCLUSION
Face mask side-effects must be assessed (risk-benefit) against the available evidence of their effectiveness against viral transmissions. In the absence of strong empirical evidence of effectiveness, mask wearing should not be mandated let alone enforced by law.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021256694, identifier: PROSPERO 2021 CRD42021256694.
Topics: Humans; Young Adult; Adult; Middle Aged; COVID-19; Masks; SARS-CoV-2; Pandemics; Carbon Dioxide; Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome; Respiratory Protective Devices; Dyspnea
PubMed: 37089476
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1125150 -
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance May 2023With COVID-19 being a newly evolving disease, its response measures largely depend on the practice of and compliance with personal protective measures (PPMs). (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
With COVID-19 being a newly evolving disease, its response measures largely depend on the practice of and compliance with personal protective measures (PPMs).
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review aimed to examine the knowledge and practice of COVID-19 PPMs in African countries as documented in the published literature.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted on the Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases using appropriate keywords and predefined eligibility criteria for the selection of relevant studies. Only population-based original research studies (including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies) conducted in Africa and published in the English language were included. The screening process and data extraction were performed according to a preregistered protocol in PROSPERO (CRD42022355101) and followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Thematic analysis was used to systematically summarize the studies into 4 predefined domains: knowledge and perception of PPMs, mask use, social and physical distancing, and handwashing and hand hygiene, including their respective levels and associated factors.
RESULTS
A total of 58 studies across 12 African countries were included, published between 2019 and 2022. African communities, including various population groups, had varying levels of knowledge and practice of COVID-19 PPMs, with the lack of personal protective equipment (mainly face masks) and side effects (among health care workers) being the major reasons for poor compliance. Lower rates of handwashing and hand hygiene were particularly noted in several African countries, especially among low-income urban and slum dwellers, with the main barrier being the lack of safe and clean water. Various cognitive (knowledge and perception), sociodemographic, and economic factors were associated with the practice of COVID-19 PPMs. Moreover, there were evident research inequalities at the regional level, with East Africa contributing 36% (21/58) of the studies, West Africa contributing 21% (12/58), North Africa contributing 17% (10/58), Southern Africa contributing 7% (4/58), and no single-country study from Central Africa. Nonetheless, the overall quality of the included studies was generally good as they satisfied most of the quality assessment criteria.
CONCLUSIONS
There is a need to enhance local capacity to produce and supply personal protective equipment. Consideration of various cognitive, demographic, and socioeconomic differences, with extra focus on the most vulnerable, is crucial for inclusive and more effective strategies against the pandemic. Moreover, more focus and involvement in community behavioral research are needed to fully understand and address the dynamics of the current pandemic in Africa.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42022355101; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022355101.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Pandemics; Health Personnel; Africa; Personal Protective Equipment
PubMed: 37058578
DOI: 10.2196/44051 -
Advanced Biomedical Research 2023Recently published researches show that 59% of all transmission came from asymptomatic transmission and at the time of diagnosis health-care workers (HCWs) tend to... (Review)
Review
Recently published researches show that 59% of all transmission came from asymptomatic transmission and at the time of diagnosis health-care workers (HCWs) tend to present without respiratory symptoms. These evidences have raised questions on whether an essential policy for use of personal protective equipment (PPE) is the best approach in HCW and other people or not. Therefore, this study conducted to investigate the effectiveness of using face masks and PPE in reducing the spread of COVID-19 in health-care and non-health-care settings. This systematic review and meta-analysis study was prepared according to the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis statement and guided by meta-analysis of observational studies recommendations. Searches in databases were conducted from December 2019 to July 2021. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed to investigate the effect of using face masks and PPE on spread of COVID-19. Heterogeneity among studies was assessed using Cochran's Q test and the metrics. In total, 9920 individuals from 14 studies were included in this study. In all settings, application of PPE or any type of masks was associated with reduction in risk of COVID-19 (odds ratio [OR] = 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.29, 0.65]; = 85.21%). In the HCW subgroup, the protective effect had a combined OR of 0.33 (95% CI: (0.15,0.73), = 82.61%). Six studies were found protective effects of wearing mask in non-HCWs (OR = 0.58, 95% CI: (0.31, 1.06), = 85.63%). Results suggest that there is association between face mask/PPE use and reduction of COVID-19.
PubMed: 37057222
DOI: 10.4103/abr.abr_337_21 -
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology Apr 2023This study reviewed the efficacy and safety of intense pulsed light (IPL) for the treatment of dry eye disease (DED). The PubMed database was used to conduct the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This study reviewed the efficacy and safety of intense pulsed light (IPL) for the treatment of dry eye disease (DED). The PubMed database was used to conduct the literature search, which used the keywords "intense pulsed light" and "dry eye disease". After the authors evaluated the articles for relevancy, 49 articles were reviewed. In general, all treatment modalities were proven to be clinically effective in reducing dry eye (DE) signs and symptoms; however, the level of improvement and persistence of outcomes differed amongst them. Meta-analysis indicated significant improvement in the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) scores post-treatment with a standardized mean difference (SMD) = -1.63; confidence interval (CI): -2.42 to -0.84. Moreover, a meta-analysis indicated a significant improvement in tear break-up time (TBUT) test values with SMD = 1.77; CI: 0.49 to 3.05. Research suggests that additive therapies, such as meibomian gland expression (MGX), sodium hyaluronate eye drops, heated eye mask, warm compress, lid hygiene, lid margin scrub, eyelid massage, antibiotic drops, cyclosporine drops, omega-3 supplements, steroid drops, and warm compresses along with IPL, have been found to work in tandem for greater effectiveness; however, in clinical practice, its feasibility and cost-effectiveness have to be taken into consideration. Current findings suggest that IPL therapy is suitable when lifestyle modifications such as reducing or eliminating the use of contact lenses, lubricating eye drops/gels, and warm compresses/eye masks fail to improve signs and symptoms of DE. Moreover, patients with compliance issues have been shown to benefit well as the effects of IPL therapy is sustained for over several months. DED is a multifactorial disorder, and IPL therapy has been found to be safe and efficient in reducing its signs and symptoms of meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD)-related DE. Although the treatment protocol varies among authors, current findings suggest that IPL has a positive effect on the signs and symptoms of MGD-related DE. However, patients in the early stages can benefit more from IPL therapy. Moreover, IPL has a better maintenance impact when used in conjunction with other traditional therapies. Further research is needed to assess cost-utility analysis for IPL.
Topics: Humans; Dry Eye Syndromes; Intense Pulsed Light Therapy; Meibomian Gland Dysfunction; Meibomian Glands; Tears
PubMed: 37026263
DOI: 10.4103/IJO.IJO_2987_22 -
SAGE Open Medicine 2023This systematic review aimed to assess the global application of behavioral change theory and models on COVID-19 preventive behaviors. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review aimed to assess the global application of behavioral change theory and models on COVID-19 preventive behaviors.
METHODS
This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses procedure. Databases such as PubMed/MIDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, EMB ASE, World Health Organization libraries, and Google Scholar were used to search all published articles in the area of application of behavioral change theory and model on COVID-19 preventive behavior until October 1, 2022. Studies published in another language other than English were excluded. Two independent reviewers did the article selection and quality check. A third reviewer asked if any disagreement were found.
RESULT
Seventeen thousand four hundred thirty-six total articles were retrieved from all sources after the removal of duplicated articles and those not evaluating the outcome of interest were excluded. Finally, 82 articles done using behavioral change theory and model on COVID-19 preventive behaviors were included. The health belief model (HBM) and theory of planned behavior (TPB) were most commonly used in COVID-19 preventive behaviors. The constructs of most behavioral theories and models were significantly associated with COVID-19 preventive behaviors such as hand washing, face mask use, vaccine uptake, social isolation, self-quarantine, social distance, and use of sanitizers.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review summarizes comprehensive evidence on the application of behavioral change theory and model on COVID-19 preventive behaviors globally. A total of seven behavioral change theories and models were included. The HBM and TPBs were most commonly used for COVID-19 preventive behaviors. Therefore, the application of behavioral change theory and models is recommended for developing behavioral change interventional strategies.
PubMed: 37026109
DOI: 10.1177/20503121231159750 -
Interactive Journal of Medical Research Mar 2023Hematological malignancies disturb the blood, lymph nodes, and bone marrow. Taking medications for treating opportunistic infections (OIs) in these individuals may... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hematological malignancies disturb the blood, lymph nodes, and bone marrow. Taking medications for treating opportunistic infections (OIs) in these individuals may enhance the risk of medication interaction as well as adverse drug reactions.
OBJECTIVE
This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of nondrug interventions in reducing OIs among patients with hematological cancers.
METHODS
The PubMed, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and Embase databases were searched on December 26, 2022, for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary endpoint was OIs. The quality of included studies was assessed by the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool.
RESULTS
A total of 6 studies were included in this review with 4 interventions: (1) types of mouthwash received, (2) presence of coating on central venous catheters (CVCs), (3) use of well-fitted masks, and (4) types of diet consumed. The results were presented in 8 different comparisons: (1) chlorhexidine-nystatin versus saline mouth rinse, (2) chlorhexidine versus saline mouth rinse, (3) nystatin versus saline mouth rinse, (4) chlorhexidine silver sulfadiazine-coated CVCs versus uncoated catheters, (5) well-fitted masks versus no mask, (6) amine fluoride-stannous fluoride versus sodium fluoride mouthwash, (7) low-bacterial diet versus standard hospital diet, and (8) herbal versus placebo mouthwash. No clear differences were reported in any of the outcomes examined in the first 3 comparisons. There were also no clear differences in the rate of catheter-related bloodstream infection or insertion site infection between the use of chlorhexidine silver sulfadiazine-coated CVCs versus uncoated catheters in the patients. Further, no significant differences were seen between patients who used a well-fitted mask and those without a mask in the incidence of OI. The all-cause mortality and mortality due to OI were similar between the 2 groups. There was no clear difference in all-cause mortality, although common adverse effects were reported in patients who used sodium fluoride mouthwash compared with those using amine fluoride-stannous fluoride mouthwash. There was no evidence of any difference in the incidence of possible invasive aspergillosis or candidemia between patients who consumed a low-bacterial diet and a standard diet. For the last comparison, no significant difference was seen between patients who received herbal and placebo mouthwash.
CONCLUSIONS
Very limited evidence was available to measure the effectiveness of nondrug interventions in hematological cancers. The effectiveness of the interventions included in this review needs to be evaluated further in high-quality RCTs in a dedicated setting among patients with hematological malignancies.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020169186; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=169186.
PubMed: 37000482
DOI: 10.2196/43969 -
Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) Feb 2023The COVID-19 pandemic due to the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been plaguing the world since late 2019/early 2020 and has changed the... (Review)
Review
The COVID-19 pandemic due to the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been plaguing the world since late 2019/early 2020 and has changed the way we function as a society, halting both economic and social activities worldwide. Classrooms, offices, restaurants, public transport, and other enclosed spaces that typically gather large groups of people indoors, and are considered focal points for the spread of the virus. For society to be able to go "back to normal", it is crucial to keep these places open and functioning. An understanding of the transmission modes occurring in these contexts is essential to set up effective infection control strategies. This understanding was made using a systematic review, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. We analyze the different parameters influencing airborne transmission indoors, the mathematical models proposed to understand it, and discuss how we can act on these parameters. Methods to judge infection risks through the analysis of the indoor air quality are described. Various mitigation measures are listed, and their efficiency, feasibility, and acceptability are ranked by a panel of experts in the field. Thus, effective ventilation procedures controlled by CO-monitoring, continued mask wearing, and a strategic control of room occupancy, among other measures, are put forth to enable a safe return to these essential places.
PubMed: 36986304
DOI: 10.3390/pathogens12030382