Efficacy and practice of facemask use in general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

In recent decades, respiratory infections, including SARS, HINI and the currently spreading COVID-19, caused by various viruses such as influenza and coronavirus have seriously threatened human health. It has generated inconsistent recommendations on the mandatory use of facemasks across countries on a population level due to insufficient evidence on the efficacy of facemask use among the general population. This meta-analysis aimed to explore (1) the efficacy of facemask use on preventing respiratory infections, and (2) the perceptions, intentions, and practice about facemask use among the general population worldwide. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane, bioRxiv, and medRxiv databases since inception to August 17, 2020. From 21,341 records identified, eight RCTs on facemask in preventing infections and 78 studies on perception, intention, and practice of facemask use among the general population were included in the analysis. The meta-analysis of RCTs found a significant protective effect of facemask intervention (OR = 0.84; 95% CI = 0.71-0.99; I2 = 0%). This protective effect was even more pronounced when the intervention duration was more than two weeks (OR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.66-0.88; I2 = 0%). The meta-analysis of observational studies on perception, intention, and practice on facemask use showed that 71% of respondents perceived facemasks to be effective for infection prevention, 68% of respondents would wear facemasks, and 54% of respondents wore facemasks for preventing respiratory infections. Differences in perception, intention, and practice behavior of facemask use in different regions may be related to the impact of respiratory infections, regional culture, and policies. The governments and relevant organizations should make effort to reduce the barriers in the use of facemasks.

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of stigma in infectious diseases, including COVID-19: a call to action.

Infectious diseases, including COVID-19, are crucial public health issues and may lead to considerable fear among the general public and stigmatization of, and discrimination against, specific populations. This meta-analysis aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of stigma in infectious disease epidemics. We systematically searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases since inception to June 08, 2021, and reported the prevalence of stigma towards people with infectious diseases including SARS, H1N1, MERS, Zika, Ebola, and COVID-19. A total of 50 eligible articles were included that contributed 51 estimates of prevalence in 92722 participants. The overall pooled prevalence of stigma across all populations was 34% [95% CI: 28-40%], including enacted stigma (36% [95% CI: 28-44%]) and perceived stigma (31% [95% CI: 22-40%]). The prevalence of stigma in patients, community population, and health care workers, was 38% [95% CI: 12- 65%], 36% [95% CI: 28-45%], and 30% [95% CI: 20-40%], respectively. The prevalence of stigma in participants from low- and middle-income countries was 37% [95% CI: 29-45%], which is higher than that from high-income countries (27% [95% CI: 18-36%]) though this difference was not statistically significant. A similar trend of prevalence of stigma was also observed in individuals with lower education (47% [95% CI: 23-71%]) compared to higher education level (33% [95% CI: 23-4%]). These findings indicate that stigma is a significant public health concern, and effective and comprehensive interventions are needed to counteract the damaging effects of the infodemics during infectious disease epidemics, including COVID-19, and reduce infectious disease-related stigma.

Prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder after infectious disease pandemics in the twenty-first century, including COVID-19: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Pandemics have become more frequent and more complex during the twenty-first century. Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) following pandemics is a significant public health concern. We sought to provide a reliable estimate of the worldwide prevalence of PTSD after large-scale pandemics as well as associated risk factors, by a systematic review and meta-analysis. We systematically searched the MedLine, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang, medRxiv, and bioRxiv databases to identify studies that were published from the inception up to August 23, 2020, and reported the prevalence of PTSD after pandemics including sudden acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), H1N1, Poliomyelitis, Ebola, Zika, Nipah, Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), H5N1, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A total of 88 studies were included in the analysis, with 77 having prevalence information and 70 having risk factors information. The overall pooled prevalence of post-pandemic PTSD across all populations was 22.6% (95% confidence interval (CI): 19.9-25.4%, I2: 99.7%). Healthcare workers had the highest prevalence of PTSD (26.9%; 95% CI: 20.3-33.6%), followed by infected cases (23.8%: 16.6-31.0%), and the general public (19.3%: 15.3-23.2%). However, the heterogeneity of study findings indicates that results should be interpreted cautiously. Risk factors including individual, family, and societal factors, pandemic-related factors, and specific factors in healthcare workers and patients for post-pandemic PTSD were summarized and discussed in this systematic review. Long-term monitoring and early interventions should be implemented to improve post-pandemic mental health and long-term recovery.