Coclite Daniela, Napoletano Antonello, Gianola Silvia, Del Monaco Andrea, D'Angelo Daniela, Fauci Alice, Iacorossi Laura, Latina Roberto, Torre Giuseppe La, Mastroianni Claudio M, Renzi Cristina, Castellini Greta, Iannone Primiano
Centro Eccellenza Clinica, Qualità e Sicurezza delle Cure, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.
Unit of Clinical Epidemiology, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 Jan 12;7:594269. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2020.594269. eCollection 2020.
Evidence is needed on the effectiveness of wearing face masks in the community to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and effectiveness of face mask use in a community setting and to predict the effectiveness of wearing a mask. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCISEARCH, The Cochrane Library, and pre-prints from inception to 22 April 2020 without restriction by language. We rated the certainty of evidence according to Cochrane and GRADE approach. Our search identified 35 studies, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (4,017 patients), 10 comparative studies (18,984 patients), 13 predictive models, nine laboratory experimental studies. For reducing infection rates, the estimates of cluster-RCTs were in favor of wearing face masks vs. no mask, but not at statistically significant levels (adjusted OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.78-1.05). Similar findings were reported in observational studies. Mathematical models indicated an important decrease in mortality when the population mask coverage is near-universal, regardless of mask efficacy. In the best-case scenario, when the mask efficacy is at 95%, the R0 can fall to 0.99 from an initial value of 16.90. Levels of mask filtration efficiency were heterogeneous, depending on the materials used (surgical mask: 45-97%). One laboratory study suggested a viral load reduction of 0.25 (95% CI 0.09-0.67) in favor of mask vs. no mask. The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis support the use of face masks in a community setting. Robust randomized trials on face mask effectiveness are needed to inform evidence-based policies. CRD42020184963.
需要有证据证明在社区中佩戴口罩预防SARS-CoV-2传播的有效性。进行系统评价和荟萃分析,以调查在社区环境中使用口罩的疗效和有效性,并预测佩戴口罩的有效性。我们检索了MEDLINE、EMBASE、SCISEARCH、Cochrane图书馆以及从创刊到2020年4月22日的预印本,不受语言限制。我们根据Cochrane和GRADE方法对证据的确定性进行评级。我们的检索共识别出35项研究,包括三项随机对照试验(RCT)(4017例患者)、10项比较研究(18984例患者)、13个预测模型、9项实验室实验研究。对于降低感染率,整群随机对照试验的估计结果显示,佩戴口罩相对于不戴口罩有优势,但未达到统计学显著水平(调整后的比值比为0.90,95%置信区间为0.78-1.05)。观察性研究也报告了类似的结果。数学模型表明,当人群口罩佩戴率接近普遍时,死亡率会显著下降,无论口罩的效果如何。在最佳情况下,当口罩效果为95%时,R0可从初始值16.90降至0.99。口罩过滤效率水平因所用材料而异(外科口罩:45%-97%)。一项实验室研究表明,佩戴口罩相对于不戴口罩,病毒载量降低了0.25(95%置信区间为0.09-0.67)。这项系统评价和荟萃分析的结果支持在社区环境中使用口罩。需要进行关于口罩有效性的有力随机试验,以为循证政策提供依据。CRD42020184963。