New research reveals special face masks prevent clinical respiratory and bacterial infections

NewsGuard 100/100 Score

Special face masks prevent bacterial infections as well as clinical respiratory ones: Surprise finding

Health care workers who consistently wear special fitted face masks while on duty are much less likely to get clinical respiratory and bacterial infections, according to new research led by University of New South Wales (UNSW) academics.

The results, published in The American Journal of Critical Care Medicine, are particularly significant with the threat of possible pandemics and severe flu seasons, such as the current outbreak in the United States.

"When there are no drugs and vaccines available, sometimes for months at a time, then all you have is masks," says the paper's first author, Professor Raina MacIntyre, an infectious diseases expert at UNSW Medicine.

"Our health care workers, particularly those who work in emergency and respiratory departments, are at the front line of risk, and these specials masks, or respirators, can protect them," she says. "They need to be wearing these regularly when they work in high risk settings or during a pandemic, not just when they think they are at risk."

The high filtration fitted face masks (known as N95 in the US, or P2 in Australia) are more expensive, and not as readily available as regular surgical face masks. Health care workers in Western countries do not regularly use any face masks, except when in theatre.

The study was conducted in China where face masks are commonplace in all health settings. Close to 1700 doctors and nurses in 19 Beijing hospitals were recruited for the study. Staff in respiratory and emergency departments, who are more likely to come across these sorts of infections, took part.

In a surprise finding, those who continuously used the N95 face masks had a protective effect not only against clinical respiratory infections, but bacterial ones too.

"Outbreaks in hospitals tend to be viral. No-one has thought of bacterial diseases as being responsible for outbreaks," Professor MacIntyre says. "In addition, bacterial co-infections commonly occur during influenza outbreaks. We suspect that if you have one infection it predisposes you to the other. There is a complex synergy between bacteria and viruses in the respiratory tract."

Those who wore the N95 mask consistently were more than twice as likely to be protected from infection, compared with those who wore a surgical mask all the time.

But the result is only significant for those who wear the masks continuously.

"This is a particularly important point," says Professor MacIntyre, the head of the School of Public Health and Community Medicine. "Many health professionals only put on a mask when they feel that they are at risk, such as if influenza has been diagnosed in their patient. But patients are often asymptomatic, and health workers may not identify all situations of risk, especially in a busy ward with high patient flow."

Professor MacIntyre has called for more awareness among health professionals and policy makers about the benefits of continuous use of N95 masks.

"You can't change a culture overnight. Practice and policy changes over time as scientific evidence changes," she says. "We need to get our health care workers used to wearing these masks, so that we are ready for any pandemic. This research is relevant for occupational health and safety policy for health workers."

Comments

  1. Matt Conlon Matt Conlon United States says:

    The seeming objective of this study was to compare the protective benefit of "standard surgical" masks that would be representative of those that are or would be used in healthcare settings, to the protective benefit N95 respirators.  The study implies that the   features of the N95 that contribute to the superior protective benefit as seen in the data, are "fit" and "filtration".  However, the "standard, tie-on surgical mask, 3M #1817" used in the surgical mask arm of this study is neither "standard", nor "surgical", nor "tie-on".  It is only available through 3M's ESPE (dental) division...of India.  It is promoted as "...fluid resistant and helps reduce potential exposure to blood and body fluids" and, given the paucity of information available on the mask, would, at best, qualify at the very lowest end of the ASTM standards.  It is unknow if it would qualify at all as a "medical" mask in the U.S.  A more representative "surgical" mask choice, taking into account establishe formal standards and classifications of surgical masks...of ANY global regulatory body...should have been considered for this and other past comparitive studies, and should certainly be taken into account moving forward.  The outcome of this study only tells us that the 3M N95 mask is superior to the 3M #1817 mask (if you can find it)  and unfortunately, nothing more.  And, this is limited to primary protective value, as "respiratory PPE".  PPE is the "last line of defense" in globally accepted hierarchy of controls, yet this N95 vs. face mask (as PPE) appears to be at the FRONT of the line in terms of research priority.  This is certainly not being driven, or even argued, on the face mask side of the fence.  More work in the area of face mask use for respiratory source control, (their originally intended purpose) such as the recent study by Milton and colleagues, would be more valuable in determining broader, more effective, means of (secondary) protection for healthcare workers...and others.

The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News Medical.
Post a new comment
Post

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions.

You might also like...
Research confirms no association between SARS-CoV-2 and childhood asthma diagnoses