SARS-CoV-2 Infection Rates Following Use of Regular Compared With Defective Respirators When Caring for COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Follow-up Study
HA Kolstad, M Frydenberg, KJ Nielsen… - Annals of work …, 2023 - academic.oup.com
Annals of work exposures and health, 2023•academic.oup.com
Background There is strong observational evidence that respirators are highly effective in
protecting the users from being infected with Middle East respiratory syndrome and severe
acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV), but the evidence for SARS-CoV-2
during daily work is limited. This study utilized a subset of healthcare workers' temporary use
of a new brand respirator with frequent defects when caring for coronavirus disease 2019
(COVID-19) patients to assess the protective effect of regular respirators against SARS-CoV …
protecting the users from being infected with Middle East respiratory syndrome and severe
acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV), but the evidence for SARS-CoV-2
during daily work is limited. This study utilized a subset of healthcare workers' temporary use
of a new brand respirator with frequent defects when caring for coronavirus disease 2019
(COVID-19) patients to assess the protective effect of regular respirators against SARS-CoV …
Background
There is strong observational evidence that respirators are highly effective in protecting the users from being infected with Middle East respiratory syndrome and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV), but the evidence for SARS-CoV-2 during daily work is limited. This study utilized a subset of healthcare workers’ temporary use of a new brand respirator with frequent defects when caring for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients to assess the protective effect of regular respirators against SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Methods
We retrospectively followed 463 participants wearing a regular respirator and 168 wearing the new brand respirator day-by-day when caring for COVID-19 patients until testing polymerase chain reaction positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 27th December 2020 and 14th January 2021.
Results
We observed seven and eight incident SARS-CoV-2-infected cases. This corresponded with daily infection rates of 0.2 and 0.5%, an incidence rate ratio of 0.4 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1; 1.0], and an incidence rate difference of 0.3% (95% CI −0.1; 0.8) when comparing a regular with the new brand respirator.
Discussion
We regard the new brand respirator a sham intervention, and this study thus provides further evidence for the protective effect of respirators when exposed to SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Oxford University Press以上显示的是最相近的搜索结果。 查看全部搜索结果