ABSTRACT
Background Consistent guidelines on respiratory protection for healthcare professionals combined with improved global supply chains are critical to prevent COVID-19. We analysed the guidelines published by national and international societies/organizations on facemasks and respirators to prevent COVID-19 in healthcare settings.
Methods From the 1st January to the 2nd April 2020, guidelines published in four countries (France, Germany, United States, United Kingdom), and two international organizations (US and European Centre for Diseases Control, and World Health Organization) were reviewed to analyse the mask and respirators recommended for healthcare settings during the COVID-19 outbreak. The aerosol generating procedures (AGP) definitions and the strategy recommended for optimizing supplies and overcoming shortages were collected.
Findings The recommendation of respirator was universally recommended for AGP across countries, although the type of respirators and what constituted an AGP was variable. Some guidance maintained the use of N95/99 for all contact with confirmed COVID-19 cases (i.e. Germany) whereas others, recommended a surgical mask (i.e. WHO, UK, France). Most guidelines were published in March with either downgraded (US and European CDC), relatively stable (WHO, Germany, and UK), or a mixing of high and low level equipment (France). The strategies to overcome shortage of respiratory protection equipment were based on minimizing the need and rationalizing the use, but also prolonging their use, reusing them after cleaning/sterilization, or using cloth masks.
Interpretations In a crisis context, stable and consistent guidelines clearly detailing the respiratory protection type, and their indications, may prevent the confusion and anxiety among frontline staff, and avoid shortage.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Healthcare Associated Infection and Antimicrobial Resistance at Imperial College London in partnership with Public Health England (PHE). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health or Public Health England. GB has received an Early Career Research Fellowship from the Antimicrobial Research Collaborative at Imperial College London, and acknowledges the support of the Welcome trust. RA is supported by a NIHR Fellowship in knowledge mobilisation. The support of ESRC as part of the Antimicrobial Cross Council initiative supported by the seven UK research councils, and also the support of the Global Challenges Research Fund, is gratefully acknowledged.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data referred to in the manuscript are available online
