ABSTRACT
Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness of widespread adoption of masks or face coverings to reduce community transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19.
Methods We created an agent-based stochastic network simulation using a variant of the standard SEIR dynamic infectious disease model. We considered a mask order that was initiated 3.5 months after the first confirmed COVID-19 case. We varied the likelihood of individuals wearing masks from 0-100% in steps of 20% (mask adherence) and considered 25% to 90% mask-related reduction in viral transmission (mask efficacy). Sensitivity analyses assessed early (by week 13) versus late (by week 42) adoption of masks and geographic differences in adherence (highest in urban and lowest in rural areas).
Results Introduction of mask use with 50% efficacy worn by 50% of individuals reduces the cumulative infection attack rate (IAR) by 27%, the peak prevalence by 49%, and population-wide mortality by 29%. If 90% of individuals wear 50% efficacious masks, this decreases IAR by 54%, peak prevalence by 75%, and population-wide mortality by 55%; similar improvements hold if 70% of individuals wear 75% efficacious masks. Late adoption reduces IAR and deaths by 18% or more compared to no adoption. Lower adoption in rural areas than urban would lead to rural areas having the highest IAR.
Conclusions Even after community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has been established, adoption of mask-wearing by a majority of community-dwelling individuals can meaningfully reduce the number and outcome of COVID-19 infections over and above physical distancing interventions.
Highlights
This paper shows the impact of widespread adoption of masks in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, with varying levels of population adherence, mask efficacy, and timing of mask adoption.
The paper’s findings help inform messaging to policymakers at the state or local level considering adding or keeping mask mandates, and to communities to promote widespread adoption of high-quality masks.
Adoption of masks by at least half of the population can reduce cumulative infections and population deaths by more than 25%, while decreasing peak prevalence by about 50%. Even greater marginal improvements arise with adoption rates above 70%. The benefits of adopting high-quality masks is above that achieved by mobility changes and distancing alone.
Rural and suburban areas are at higher relative risk than urban areas, due to less distancing and lower adoption of masks.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The project described was supported in part by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health, through Grant Award Number UL1TR002489. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. The research was also supported by the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, NC State University, the Fitts Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at NC State, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and the Cornell Institute for Disease and Disaster Preparedness. The funding agreement ensured the independence of the authors in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing, and publishing the report. Several of the authors are employed by the state universities associated with the sponsorship.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This manuscript uses publicly available data from the US Census, published estimates of disease parameters, and data obtained from SafeGraph on mobility across communities. The Institutional Review Board of NC State reviewed the project and determined that no IRB approval would be needed since identifiers are not included with the dataset and individuals cannot be directly or indirectly identified.
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
Footnotes
Declarations
Funding: Financial support for this study was provided in part in part by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health, through Grant Award Number UL1TR002489. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. The research was also supported by the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, NC State University, the Fitts Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at NC State, and the Georgia Institute of Technology. The funding agreement ensured the authors’ independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing, and publishing the report. Several of the authors are employed by the state universities associated with the sponsorship. We would like to acknowledge Dr. Nicoleta Serban of Georgia Tech for her work on a previous Covid-19 simulation and Dr. Mehul Patel for his leadership on the CovSim initiative. The funding agreement ensured the authors’ independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing, and publishing the report. All of the authors are employed by the state universities associated with the sponsorship.
Conflicts of Interest/Competing Interests: There are no conflicts to declare.
Availability of data and material: Data used in the simulation is publicly available, and parameters are included with the supplemental document.
Code availability: Computer code is not presently available publicly as it is associated with the dissertation work of several PhD students.
Authors’ contributions: All authors contributed to the analysis in the manuscript and the writing of the paper.
In this version, we added additional scenarios where mask adoption occurs later, mobility was updated to use SafeGraph data stratified by urbanicity and income quartile, and an additional figure was added. Changes were made throughout for clarity.
Data Availability
The US Census data that was used is publicly available. The paper also uses disease estimates from the literature. Data was obtained from SafeGraph (SafeGraph.com) with the company's permission; similar data can be obtained by other researchers upon request to the company. The data sources are clearly outlined in a supplemental file made available to readers.
