Perceptions towards mask use in school children during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: the Ciao Corona Study

INTRODUCTION

The contribution of school children to the spread of SARS-CoV-2 remains a controversial topic. In 2020-2021, policy decisions on schools ranged internationally from a complete closure over many months to keeping them fully open throughout the pandemic.^1,2 While children rarely develop severe health outcomes ^3–5, SARS-CoV-2 infection rates among children and adolescents are generally similar to those in adults.^6,7 However, major outbreaks of clustered SARS-CoV-2 infections in schools are rare.^7–9 Both the specific characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 infection in children (lower viral load and more frequent asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic infections) and the effective mitigation measures taken up by schools, including mask wearing of adults and children, could have contributed to the limited spread in schools.^10–12 Despite this uncertainty, numerous countries implemented nationwide school closures to confine the diffusion of SARS-CoV-2 infections.^2,13Worldwide, about 150 countries fully closed their schools at some point in 2020-2021, while only a few countries partially closed schools or kept schools open during the pandemic.¹⁴In Switzerland, schools were open with preventive measures in place, except during a 6-week nationwide lockdown from March 16 to May 10, 2020. Subsequently, schools were instructed to implement protective measures (e.g., social distancing, frequent hand washing, implementation of class bubbles in schools). Wearing masks became compulsory in public transport and in situations where physical distance (2m, later 1.5m) could not be maintained from July 2020 for all persons beyond 12 years age. From November 2020 on, masks became compulsory for adults and secondary school children (grade 7 and higher) in educational settings. From February 2021, wearing of masks was extended to primary school children in the middle school level (grade 4 and higher).

Although masks have been shown to reduce the risk of community SARS-CoV-2 transmission^15–19, prolonged wearing of masks may be perceived as a burden and can be associated with potential side effects, such as headaches or skin irritation in adults and children.^20,21 Willingness to wear masks is influenced by perceived benefits and social norms, and refusal by negative attitudes or side effects.^22,23 To this date, the authors are unaware of any study investigating the perceived usefulness and attitudes towards mask wearing in children and adolescents. Hence, this study explored school children’s perceptions towards the usefulness of masks in- and outside the school setting from randomly selected schools in the canton of Zürich, Switzerland. In a second step, the study focused on the potential association between perception of usefulness and school level (secondary versus primary school), gender, and parents’ educational attainment²⁴. In a third step, changes of perception over time were documented in secondary school children.

METHODS

RESULTS

Perception of mask usefulness

At Q1, the majority of children and adolescents perceived masks as useful, both at school (n = 357, 60%) and in public (n = 408, 69%). At Q2, 57% (638) participants perceived masks as useful at school, and 60% (675) in public. At Q2, masks were perceived as useful at school by 354 (59%) of primary and 284 (55%) of secondary school children (p=0.2), and in public by 366 (61%) of primary and 309 (59%) of secondary school children (p=0.2). Detailed responses to the questions of mask usefulness at Q1 and Q2 for both school levels are provided in Supplementary Table S2.

At Q2, girls perceived mask wearing as useful more often than boys both at school (61% vs 53%, p = .018; Figure 1A) and in public (64% vs 57%, p = .026); Figure S1). The difference between girls and boys was similar at Q1 (at school: 63% vs 56%, p=.2; in public: 71% vs 67%, p=.3; Supplementary Table S3).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1

Comparison of perceived usefulness of mask wearing at school between boys and girls (A) and according to parents’ educational attainment (B) at Q2 Two children indicated their gender as “other”. Higher educational attainment was defined as at least one parent having at least a technical college or university degree.

At Q2, 71% (781 of 1095 with reported information) of participating children had at least one parent with high educational attainment. Children of parents with higher educational attainment were more likely to perceive mask wearing as useful at school (61% vs 49%, p < 0.001; Figure 1B) and in public (63% vs 54%, p =0.019; Figure S1). At Q1, the difference was somewhat smaller for perceived usefulness at school (63% vs 57%, p=0.3), and similar to that in Q2 for usefulness in public (74% vs 63%, p=0.026; Supplementary Table S3).

DISCUSSION

This study explored the perception of the usefulness of masks at school and in public among children and adolescents from randomly selected schools enrolled in the Ciao Corona study, from January to May 2021 in the canton of Zurich, Switzerland. We found that approximately 60% of participants perceive wearing of masks as useful, both at school and in public. Girls valued the usefulness of masks higher than boys, and children of at least on parent with a higher education (i.e., technical college or university degree) perceived masks as more useful compared to those of parents of lower educational background. Perceived usefulness of wearing masks in public, but not at school, decreased over time. Among all survey participants, a small proportion of school children reported general side effects and discomfort (7% at Q1 and 4% at Q2) or situation-specific complaints (2% at Q1 and 4% at Q2) associated with masks.

In this study, we found a 60% acceptance of wearing masks with a large proportion of school children reporting to perceive them as useful at school (57-60%) and in public (60-69%). Some survey participants providing free-text comments about masks reported on the necessity of wearing masks to protect others, and some children even complained about others not wearing their masks according to school rules. On the other hand, roughly one third of the survey participants did not perceive masks in school-settings as useful. Among those, participants provided specific free-text comments about masks significantly more frequently, indicating a bias towards negative comments. Such comments were sometimes rather non-informative (“masks are useless”, “I hate masks”), but others pointed towards physical discomfort and side-effects, such as fatigue, decreased concentration, headaches, or acne. Mandatory wearing of masks was often criticized for specific situations, especially during physical education classes but also during breaks.

Complaints about masks, particularly of their side-effects, need to be considered on an individual basis. In settings with potential widespread transmission and where physical distance of at least one meter cannot be guaranteed, the use of masks for children aged 6 years and older is recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).²⁸ As schools were fully open in Switzerland during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, except for a 6-week nationwide lockdown, the wearing of masks was introduced for school children grades 4 and higher along with other protective measures to keep transmission rates as low as possible. Importantly, the current evidence for the use of masks during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in the pediatric population including benefit–harm evaluation is limited. Laboratory-based experimental studies investigating short-term effects of various types of masks (e.g., surgical mask, FFP2, or N95 respirators) worn at rest and during exercise on physiological variables and individuals’ perception of breathing are controversial.^29–31 Long-term studies and benefit-harm assessments of the burden of masks and other mitigation measures, complete closures of schools ^32–34, and effect on SARS-CoV-2 transmission mitigation would be needed to evaluate the role of masks in the pediatric population. Yet, as masks are usually only one of several implemented mitigation measures, it will always be challenging to tease out the unique effect of masks on infection control.

Children whose parents had a higher educational background and girls perceived masks as more useful. In contrast, we did not see a difference between perception of middle and upper school level children, as a proxy of age. Associations between gender and education with the willingness to wear masks has been shown in previous studies in adults.^24,35,36 For example, in an analysis of almost 10’000 shoppers, female gender, older age, and urban location were associated with higher odds of an individual to wear a mask.²⁴ Hence, schools could provide tailored information about masks to reach different groups of children, and to actively engage them in a dialogue about potential benefits and harms.

Although the absolute difference was small, the proportion of school children rating masks as useful in public was higher than the proportion rating masks useful at school (60% versus 57% at Q2). One potential explanation could stem from the prolonged wearing of masks in school-settings where masks, on average, are worn between six and eight hours a day, as reported by participants (Supplementary Table S4). Outside the school-setting, masks are usually only required short-term in certain places, such as public transport or supermarkets. Secondly, children and adolescents may feel safer in a classroom environment than in public due to the implementation of various additional measures as part of a school’s protection concept, and thus perceive mask wearing there as relatively less useful. In addition, the proportion of children perceiving mask wearing as useful slightly decreased from January to April 2021, at school from 60% to 57% and in public from 69% to 60%, respectively. This could be related to the longer overall exposure of wearing masks at Q2 compared to Q1, as well as to the lower community incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections at Q2.

This study has a number of limitations. First, the online questionnaires nested within the Ciao Corona study were usually completed by parents/legal guardians. Parents were explicitly encouraged to complete the part of the questionnaires about masks together with their children or to let their child respond to these questions alone. Nevertheless, it is not entirely clear to what extent children’s perceptions towards masks were reported by children themselves, and thus captured correctly, as social desirability bias is possible. Second, children’s behaviour and perceptions are largely influenced by their parents’, teachers’, and peers’ beliefs and behaviour.^37,38 Thus, it is also likely that parents who were skeptical towards certain restrictions and measures implemented during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic did not take part in the Ciao Corona study, and did not allow their children to participate, resulting in potential selection bias in the study population. Third, side-effects reported by some survey participants cannot be (clinically) verified and would require a different study design. Finally, our study sample consisted of a larger proportion of parents with high educational background (60% at Q1 and 71% at Q2) than would be expected in the general population.³⁹ Consequently, our findings likely do not reflect the entire spectrum of perceptions about the usefulness of masks in the general population, and may to some extent overestimate the perceived value of masks in schools and public.

CONCLUSION

In summary, our findings suggest that 60% of children perceive masks as a useful measure to mitigate SARS-CoV-2 transmission at school and in public, with slightly higher perception of usefulness among girls and families of higher socio-economic background. Certain complaints of some children, such as physical discomfort and side-effects due to the prolonged wearing of masks, should be addressed in order to ensure the maintenance of mask wearing, and ultimately protect the health and well-being of children and adults at schools and beyond.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, on reasonable request.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

SK and MAP initiated the cohort study in which this study is embedded. AU, PA, TR and SK designed the research questions and the study, and were responsible for the study organization and procedures. PA was responsible for the organization of testing at schools in 2021. PA and TR were responsible for the online surveys and provided guidance to participants, if needed. AU, SRH, and PA carried out the statistical analysis. All authors contributed to the interpretation of study findings. PA and TR wrote the first draft of the manuscript, and all authors critically reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

FUNDING

This study is part of Corona Immunitas research network, coordinated by the Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), and funded by fundraising of SSPH+ that includes funds of the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health and private funders (ethical guidelines for funding stated by SSPH+ will be respected), by funds of some Cantons of Switzerland and by institutional funds of the Universities. Additional funding, specific to this study is available from the University of Zurich Foundation. The funder/sponsor did not have any role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

ETHICS APPROVAL

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland (2020-01336). All participants provided written informed consent before being enrolled in the study.