Seroprevalence of 2009 H1N1 Virus Infection and Self-Reported Infection Control Practices Among Healthcare Professionals Following the First Outbreak in Bangkok, Thailand

Chokephaibulkit, Kulkanya; Assanasen, Susan; Apisarnthanarak, Anucha; Rongrungruang, Yong; Kachintorn, Kanchana; Tuntiwattanapibul, Yuwadee; Judaeng, Tepnimitr; Puthavathana, Pilaipan

doi:10.1111/irv.12016

Cited by 13 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The search details of the study selection process are shown in Figure 1 , and a summary of the included studies are presented in Table 1 . Among them, 18 articles ( 2 , 5 , 6 , 29 – 32 , 34 , 36 , 38 , 40 – 48 ) were case-control studies, 7 articles ( 1 , 4 , 26 , 28 , 33 , 39 , 45 ) were cohort studies, and 6 articles ( 3 , 10 , 11 , 27 , 35 , 37 ) were RCTs. In case-control studies, 14 studies ( 2 , 5 , 6 , 29 – 31 , 34 , 36 , 38 , 43 , 44 , 46 – 48 ) were of high quality ( Supplementary Table 2 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Associations Between Wearing Masks and Respiratory Viral Infections: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Chen

Wang

Quan

et al. 2022

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundRespiratory viral infections (RVIs) are a major health concern, and some previous studies have shown that wearing masks was effective in preventing RVIs, while others failed to show such effect. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of wearing masks.MethodsPubMed, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP database) were searched for studies evaluating the effectiveness of wearing masks. The risk ratio (RR) was used to measure the effectiveness of wearing masks in preventing RVIs for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies, and the odds ratio (OR) was used for case-control studies. Forest plots were used to visually assess pooled estimates and corresponding 95% CIs. The I2 test was used to examine the heterogeneity, and subgroup analysis was used to explore the possible explanations for heterogeneity or compare the results between subgroups. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess robustness of the synthesized results. Begg's test and Egger's test were used to assess the publications bias.ResultsThirty-one studies (13,329 participants) were eligible for meta-analyses. Overall, the results showed that wearing masks was effective in preventing RVIs. The sensitivity analysis showed that the results of those meta-analyses were robust and reliable. There was no significant publication bias in meta-analysis of case-control studies and most subgroup analyses.ConclusionsWearing masks might be effective in preventing RVIs. To reduce their RVI risk, people should wear masks when they go out in public.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42021296092.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Associations Between Wearing Masks and Respiratory Viral Infections: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Chen

Wang

Quan

et al. 2022

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is possible that the frequency of cleaning and disinfection may be higher or lower than that reported here, as has been demonstrated in studies comparing self-report with observed handwashing in HCWs (Jenner et al, 2006; O’Boyle et al, 2001). Self-report of safety practices among HCWs, however, has been considered an important outcome in prior research (Chokephaibulkit et al, 2013). Finally, it is unclear how consistently cleaning and disinfection is emphasized during initial and interval respirator training.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cleaning and Disinfection Perceptions and Use Practices Among Elastomeric Respirator Users in Health care

Hines

Brown

Oliver

et al. 2020

Workplace Health Saf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Reusable elastomeric respirator use in health care may represent one solution to address N95 respirator shortages experienced during infectious disease outbreaks, but cleaning and disinfection requirements may limit their utility. Evidence of respirator cleaning and disinfection behaviors and practices by health care workers may inform guidance on reusable respirator use. Methods: Medical system elastomeric respirator users were surveyed about respirator cleaning and disinfection practices and perceptions via an electronic survey. Respondents were subsequently classified based on reported compliance with their assigned respirator use. To explore whether respirator cleaning and disinfection issues affected compliance with assigned device use, responses were compared between user groups and adjusted for covariates. Results: A total of 432 of 2,024 (21%) eligible elastomeric respirator users completed the survey. Most (>90%) reported that their respirator was clean, but only 52% reported that they always disinfect their respirators after use according to the hospital’s expected practice. Only 40 respondents (9%) reported regularly cleaning the respirator with soap and water, in accordance with manufacturer recommendations. Reporting of suboptimal decontamination practice was not associated with assigned device compliance, however, except among providers and respiratory therapists. Conclusion/Application to Practice: Although perceptions of cleanliness and adherence to expected decontamination practices during routine use did not appear to influence compliance with assigned respirator use overall, this did predict compliance among providers and respiratory therapists, both of whom have nonfixed workstations. Practical and effective strategies to assure easy access to and availability of clean reusable respiratory protective devices are needed to facilitate their use in health care respiratory protection programs.

show abstract

“…Following the literature search and screening (Fig. 1), a total of 21 studies which included 13 case-control studies, 6 cluster randomized trials, and 2 cohort studies met our inclusion criteria [4,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35] (Table 1). Among them, 12 studies investigated HCWs, 8 studies investigated non-healthcare professional populations, and the remaining one study investigated HCWs and relatives of patients.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Eligible Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of face mask in preventing respiratory virus transmission: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Liang

Gao

Cheng

et al. 2020

Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease

404

360

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Conflicting recommendations exist related to whether masks have a protective effect on the spread of respiratory viruses. Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement was consulted to report this systematic review. Relevant articles were retrieved from PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP (Chinese) database. Results: A total of 21 studies met our inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses suggest that mask use provided a significant protective effect (OR = 0.35 and 95% CI = 0.24-0.51). Use of masks by healthcare workers (HCWs) and non-healthcare workers (Non-HCWs) can reduce the risk of respiratory virus infection by 80% (OR = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.11-0.37) and 47% (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.36-0.79). The protective effect of wearing masks in Asia (OR = 0.31) appeared to be higher than that of Western countries (OR = 0.45). Masks had a protective effect against influenza viruses (OR = 0.55), SARS (OR = 0.26), and SARS-CoV-2 (OR = 0.04). In the subgroups based on different study designs, protective effects of wearing mask were significant in cluster randomized trials and observational studies. Conclusions: This study adds additional evidence of the enhanced protective value of masks, we stress that the use masks serve as an adjunctive method regarding the COVID-19 outbreak.

show abstract

Seroprevalence of 2009 H1N1 Virus Infection and Self-Reported Infection Control Practices Among Healthcare Professionals Following the First Outbreak in Bangkok, Thailand

Cited by 13 publications

References 10 publications

Associations Between Wearing Masks and Respiratory Viral Infections: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Associations Between Wearing Masks and Respiratory Viral Infections: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Cleaning and Disinfection Perceptions and Use Practices Among Elastomeric Respirator Users in Health care

Efficacy of face mask in preventing respiratory virus transmission: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About