Abstract
Background Healthcare workers (HCWs) and other essential workers are at risk for occupational infection during the COVID-19 pandemic. Several infection control strategies have been implemented. Particularly, evidence shows that universal masking can mitigate COVID-19 infection, though existing research is limited by secular trend bias.
Aims To investigate the effect of hospital universal masking on COVID-19 incidence among HCWs compared to the general community population.
Methods We compared the 7-day averaged incidence rates between a Massachusetts (USA) healthcare system and Massachusetts residents statewide. The study period was from March 17 (the date of first incident case in the healthcare system) to May 6 (the date Massachusetts implemented public masking). The healthcare system implemented universal masking on March 26, we allotted a 5-day lag for effect onset, and peak COVID-19 incidence in Massachusetts was April 20. Thus, we categorized March 17-31 as the pre-intervention phase, April 1-20 the intervention phase, and April 21-May 6 the post-intervention phase. Temporal incidence trends (i.e. 7-day average slopes) were compared using standardized coefficients from linear regression models.
Results The standardized coefficients were similar between the healthcare system and the state in both the pre- and post-intervention phases. During the intervention phase, the healthcare system’s epidemic slope became negative (standardized β: -0.68, 95% CI: –1.06 - -0.31), while Massachusetts’ slope remained positive (standardized β: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.94 – 1.05).
Conclusions Universal masking at the healthcare system was associated with flattening the COVID-19 curve among HCWs, while the infection rate continued to rise in the surrounding community.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
None of the authors receives funding toward the present study.
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:
The Institutional Review Board of Cambridge Health Alliance reviewed the parent study protocol, determined it to be exempt and waived informed consent based on the use of existing, HIPAA-deidentified data.
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
De-identified data are available upon request.
https://www.mass.gov/info-details/covid-19-response-reporting
