Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGreenhalgh, Trish et al.
dc.description.abstractMost real-world research comparing standard face masks with respirator masks has been in the context of influenza or other relatively benign respiratory conditions and based in hospitals. There are no published head-to-head trials of these interventions in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, COVID-19, and no trials in primary or community care settings. Current guidance is therefore based partly on indirect evidence – notably, from past influenza, SARS and MERS outbreaks – as well as expert opinion and custom and practice. Policy guidance from various bodies (e.g. Public Health England, WHO) emphasises the need to assess the contagion risk of an encounter and use the recommended combination of equipment for that situation. A respirator mask and other highly effective PPE (eye protection, gloves, long-sleeved gown, used with good donning/doffing technique) are needed to protect against small airborne particles in aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) such as intubation. For non-AGPs, there is no evidence that respirator masks add value over standard masks when both are used with recommended wider PPE measures.en_US
dc.subjectInfectious Diseasesen_US
dc.subjectRespiratory Protective Devicesen_US
dc.subjectPrimary Health Careen_US
dc.subjectHealth Personnelen_US
dc.titleWhat is the efficacy of standard face masks compared to respirator masks in preventing COVID-type respiratory illnesses in primary care staff?en_US
eihealth.categoryInfection prevention and control, including health care workers protectionen_US
eihealth.typePublished Articleen_US
eihealth.maincategoryProtect Health Care Workers / Proteger la Salud de los Trabajadoresen_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalCentre for Evidence-Based Medicineen_US

Files in this item


There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record