| Autor: |
Kolstad, Henrik A, Frydenberg, Morten, Nielsen, Kent Jacob, Schlünssen, Vivi, Biering, Karin, Kjærsgaard, Mona, Vestergaard, Jesper Medom, Würtz, Else Toft, Pugdahl, Kirsten, Würtz, Anne Mette Lund, Hansen, Karoline Kærgaard, Jespersen, Sanne, Thomsen, Marianne Kragh, Sørensen, Mette Marie, Ellermann-Eriksen, Svend, Redder, Jacob Dvinge, Storgaard, Merete |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Annals of Work Exposures & Health; Jan2023, Vol. 67 Issue 1, p141-146, 6p |
| Abstrakt: |
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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
