ABSTRACT
Background and Objectives: There are conflicting views regarding face mask guidelines amongst healthcare staff to prevent transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), influenza and other respiratory viral infections (RVIs). We conducted a thorough meta-analysis to statistically compare mask use versus no mask use efficacy for RVIs in healthcare settings. Materials and Methods: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were used for selecting researches published between 2003 and June 2022 from different databases, including Publisher Medline (PubMed), Web of Science, etc.;6 studies qualified for inclusion. Data was pooled from in vivo randomized control, case-control and observational studies dealing with the relationship between face mask use and no use by patients or health personnel and RVI prevention in healthcare setups. Results: The fixed and random-effects model was carried out to determine pooled odds ratios (ORs) and their respective 95 percent confidence intervals (CIs). The results revealed that wearing a face mask significantly reduced the risk of contracting a respiratory viral illness in hospital settings, with pooled OR (95% CI) of 0.11 (0.04 to 0.33) (probability value (P) <0.08). Conclusion: Masks largely succeeded in stopping respiratory virus transmission, as evidenced by the meta-analysis of 6 studies (a total of 927 individuals). [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Iranian Journal of Microbiology is the property of Tehran University of Medical Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)
ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in more than 6.2 million deaths worldwide. Despite advances in the treatment of this disease over the last 2 years, the only way out of the pandemic is vaccination against the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which is constantly confronted with considerable mistrust and fears of adverse reactions (ADRs) in Slovakia. The aim of this study is to analyse reported suspicions of ADRs of registered COVID-19 vaccines (Comirnaty, Vaxzevria, Spikevax), which the State Institute for Drug Control received from health care professionals and patients between 1 January and 31 May 2021. The program R (version 3.6.3), a language and environment for statistical calculations, GNU GPL license was used for data analysis. During the evaluation period, 5,763 reported suspicions of ADRs were analysed. Overall, there was a significant (p < .0001) fivefold increase in the number of reported ADRs. Ninety-three percent of ADRs (n = 5,346) were reported for COVID-19 vaccines. No statistically significant difference (p = .238) was identified between Spikevax and Comirnaty in the proportion of serious ADRs. However, a significantly higher (p = .00001) proportion of reported suspicions of severe ADRs was observed with Vaxzevria. There is a significant difference in the ratio of serious ADRs between the sexes for all COVID-19 vaccines (p < .00001);in women this ratio is in all cases significantly higher than in men (p < .0001). ADRs were most often reported by patients (p < .0001). In Slovakia, the rate of spontaneous reporting of suspected ADRs has been low for a long time;in the period between January and May 2021, however, the rate increased as a result of active calls for ADR reporting, most often from patients. According to European data, Vaxzevria has a significantly higher ratio of reported suspicions of serious ADRs. For all vaccines, the incidence of severe ADRs is significantly higher in women. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Acta Facultatis Pharmaceuticae Universitatis Comenianae is the property of Sciendo and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)