Risk estimation of lifted mask mandates and emerging variants using mathematical model.

Background: More than half of the population in Korea had a prior COVID-19 infection. In 2022, most nonpharmaceutical interventions, except mask-wearing indoors, had been lifted. And in 2023, the indoor mask mandates were eased. Methods: We developed an age-structured compartmental model that distinguishes vaccination history, prior infection, and medical staff from the rest of the population. Contact patterns among hosts were separated based on age and location. We simulated scenarios with the lifting of the mask mandate all at once or sequentially according to the locations. Furthermore, we investigated the impact of a new variant assuming that it has higher transmissibility and risk of breakthrough infection. Results: We found that the peak size of administered severe patients may not exceed 1100 when the mask mandate is lifted everywhere, and 800 if the mask mandate only remains in the hospital. If the mask mandate is lifted in a sequence (except hospital), then the peak size of administered severe patients may not exceed 650. Moreover, if the new variant has both higher transmissibility and immune reduction, the effective reproductive number of the new variant is approximately 3 times higher than that of the current variant, and additional interventions may be needed to keep the administered severe patients from exceeding 2,000, which is the critical level we set. Conclusion: Our findings showed that the lifting of the mask mandate, except in hospitals, would be more manageable if implemented sequentially. Considering a new variant, we found that depending on the population immunity and transmissibility of the variant, wearing masks and other interventions may be necessary for controlling the disease.

A Survey of Public Health Failures During COVID-19.

The prolonged coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has raised concerns about the failures in the public health measures used to manage the spread of this deadly virus. This review focuses its attention on research papers that at their core highlight the individual public health measures instituted by organizations, institutions, and the government of the United States (US) since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and that were published in 2019 to 2022. Together, these sources help paint a well-rounded view of the US management of this pandemic so that conclusions may be drawn from mistakes that were made and this country may respond better in the future to such situations. This paper is unique because it highlights the areas where improvement is needed, whereas other published work describes the measures taken and how they were carried out, not the failures, which leaves a gap in the literature that this paper hopes to fill. Through a deep dive into public health measures, seven areas in which improvements could be made were pinpointed by the authors. Such measures included mask mandates, social distancing, lockdown/quarantine, hand hygiene, COVID-19 testing, travel screening, and vaccine hesitancy. In exploring each measure, a discussion was carried out about its benefits and shortcomings in alleviating the ramifications of a global pandemic. In addition to the poor supply chain for critical products like personal protective equipment (PPE), the miscommunication between states and federal policies did not allow for the entirety of the US to respond cohesively in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. This general review is crucial to know what is working and what needs to be changed to increase the benefits provided to the population.

The mitigating effect of masks on the spread of Covid-19.

We use US state-level data from early in the pandemic -March 15, 2020 to November 15, 2020- to estimate the effects of mask mandates and compliance with mandates on Covid-19 cases and deaths, conditional on mobility. A one-standard-deviation increase in mobility is associated with a 6 to 20 percent increase in the cases growth rate; a mask mandate can offset about one third of this increase with our most conservative estimates. Also, mask mandates are more effective in states with higher compliance. Given realized mobility, our estimates imply that total infections in the US on November 15, 2020 would have been 23.7 to 30.4 percent lower if a national mask mandate had been enacted on May 15, 2020. This reduction in cases translates to a 25 to 35 percent smaller decline in aggregate hours worked over the same period relative to a 2019 baseline.

High rates of observed face mask use at Colorado universities align with students' opinions about masking and support the safety and viability of in-person higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, colleges and universities have focused on creating policies, such as mask mandates, to minimize COVID-19 transmission both on their campuses and in the surrounding community. Adherence to and opinions about these policies remain largely unknown. METHODS: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) developed a cross-sectional study, the Mask Adherence and Surveillance at Colleges and Universities Project (MASCUP!), to objectively and inconspicuously measure rates of mask use at institutes of higher education via direct observation. From February 15 through April 11, 2021 the University of Colorado Boulder (CU, n = 2,808 observations) and Colorado State University Fort Collins (CSU, n = 3,225 observations) participated in MASCUP! along with 52 other institutes of higher education (n = 100,353 observations) spanning 21 states and the District of Columbia. Mask use was mandatory at both Colorado universities and student surveys were administered to assess student beliefs and attitudes. RESULTS: We found that 91.7%, 93.4%, and 90.8% of persons observed at indoor locations on campus wore a mask correctly at University of Colorado, Colorado State University, and across the 52 other schools, respectively. Student responses to questions about masking were in line with these observed rates of mask use where 92.9% of respondents at CU and 89.8% at CSU believe that wearing masks can protect the health of others. Both Colorado universities saw their largest surges in COVID-19 cases in the fall of 2020, with markedly lower case counts during the mask observation window in the spring of 2021. CONCLUSION: High levels of mask use at Colorado's two largest campuses aligned with rates observed at other institutes across the country. These high rates of use, coupled with positive student attitudes about mask use, demonstrate that masks were widely accepted and may have contributed to reduced COVID-19 case counts. This study supports an emerging body of literature substantiating masks as an effective, low-cost measure to reduce disease transmission and establishes masking (with proper education and promotion) as a viable tactic to reduce respiratory disease transmission on college campuses.

Masking up and the role of the police

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic placed many challenges on policing, from limiting officers' ability to interact with citizens to enforcing regulations to prevent the spread of the virus. One of those regulations, and the focus of the current study, is mask mandates. Design/methodology/approach: Using a sample of over 550 US adults recruited on Amazon MTurk, the current study examines factors that may influence citizen attitudes toward the police's role in mask enforcement, with a specific focus on perceptions of the police, political leanings, and views about COVID-19 and mask-wearing. Findings: The authors find that when respondents believed COVID-19 was serious and a major public health threat, they were more likely to believe the police should enforce masks, regardless of attitudes about the police, political party affiliation or other demographics. Originality/value: The enforcement of public health mandates, such as mask wearing, often result in arguments related to the infringement of rights and questions about the overall legality of enforcement. This often puts law enforcement in a difficult position regarding how such mandates should be enforced and whether it is the responsibility of the police. Additional policy implications are discussed. © 2023, Emerald Publishing Limited.

Evaluating the Impact of Mask Mandates and Political Party Affiliation on Mental Health Internet Search Behavior in the United States During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Generalized Additive Mixed Model Framework.

BACKGROUND: The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health worldwide and in the United States have been well documented. However, there is limited research examining the long-term effects of the pandemic on mental health, particularly in relation to pervasive policies such as statewide mask mandates and political party affiliation. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to examine whether statewide mask mandates and political party affiliations yielded differential changes in mental health symptoms across the United States by leveraging state-specific internet search query data. METHODS: This study leveraged Google search queries from March 24, 2020, to March 29, 2021, in each of the 50 states in the United States. Of the 50 states, 39 implemented statewide mask mandates-with 16 of these states being Republican-to combat the spread of COVID-19. This study investigated whether mask mandates were associated differentially with mental health in states with and without mandates by exploring variations in mental health search queries across the United States. In addition, political party affiliation was examined as a potential covariate to determine whether mask mandates had differential associations with mental health in Republican and Democratic states. Generalized additive mixed models were implemented to model associations among mask mandates, political party affiliation, and mental health search volume for up to 7 months following the implementation of a mask mandate. RESULTS: The results of generalized additive mixed models revealed that search volume for "restless" significantly increased following a mask mandate across all states, whereas the search volume for "irritable" and "anxiety" increased and decreased, respectively, following a mandate for Republican states in comparison with Democratic states. Most mental health search terms did not exhibit significant changes in search volume in relation to mask mandate implementation. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that mask mandates were associated nonlinearly with significant changes in mental health search behavior, with the most notable associations occurring in anxiety-related search terms. Therefore, policy makers should consider monitoring and providing additional support for these mental health symptoms following the implementation of public health-related mandates such as mask mandates. Nevertheless, these results do not provide evidence for an overwhelming impact of mask mandates on population-level mental health in the United States.

State mask mandates and psychological reactance theory: The role of political partisanship and COVID-19 risk in mask adoption and resistance.

RATIONALE: Psychological reactance theory was applied to examine the implications of state-level mask mandates in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the role of political partisanship and COVID-19 risk on changes in self-reported mask wearing before and after the imposition and removal of state mask mandates. METHOD: Secondary data from several sources were aggregated about self-reported mask wearing behavior, state mandates, COVID-19 infection rates, and state-level political partisanship. Difference-in-differences tests were performed using logistic regression to evaluate whether change in mask wearing behavior following the imposition or removal of a mandate was greater in states based on state-level political partisanship and COVID-19 infection rates. RESULTS: Although mask adoption generally increased following mandates, the amount of increase was smaller in more Republican states compared to more Democratic states. Mask wearing generally decreased following the removal of mandates, with greater decreases when COVID-19 infection rates were lower. CONCLUSION: The results collectively offer insights about the nuanced role of contextual factors in the adoption and resistance to masks following state mask mandates. Partisanship was important in responses to the imposition of state mask mandates and COVID-19 risk played a critical role in responses to mandate removal.

Duration of Behavioral Policy Interventions and Incidence of COVID-19 by Social Vulnerability of US Counties, April-December 2020.

OBJECTIVE: State-issued behavioral policy interventions (BPIs) can limit community spread of COVID-19, but their effects on COVID-19 transmission may vary by level of social vulnerability in the community. We examined the association between the duration of BPIs and the incidence of COVID-19 across levels of social vulnerability in US counties. METHODS: We used COVID-19 case counts from USAFacts and policy data on BPIs (face mask mandates, stay-at-home orders, gathering bans) in place from April through December 2020 and the 2018 Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We conducted multilevel linear regression to estimate the associations between duration of each BPI and monthly incidence of COVID-19 (cases per 100 000 population) by SVI quartiles (grouped as low, moderate low, moderate high, and high social vulnerability) for 3141 US counties. RESULTS: Having a BPI in place for longer durations (ie, ≥2 months) was associated with lower incidence of COVID-19 compared with having a BPI in place for <1 month. Compared with having no BPI in place or a BPI in place for <1 month, differences in marginal mean monthly incidence of COVID-19 per 100 000 population for a BPI in place for ≥2 months ranged from -4 cases in counties with low SVI to -401 cases in counties with high SVI for face mask mandates, from -31 cases in counties with low SVI to -208 cases in counties with high SVI for stay-at-home orders, and from -227 cases in counties with low SVI to -628 cases in counties with high SVI for gathering bans. CONCLUSIONS: Establishing COVID-19 prevention measures for longer durations may help reduce COVID-19 transmission, especially in communities with high levels of social vulnerability.

Mask Mandates and Dilemmas of Disability Difference.

A number of recent legal cases in the United States have considered both disability-based exceptions to Covid-19-related mask mandates and disability-based claims to stronger masking rules in states restricting the abilities of local governments to enforce mask mandates. We argue that a proper legal and ethical analysis of such cases requires understanding the distinction between disability accommodations and disability modifications. Disability accommodations are individualized adjustments that enable qualified individuals to perform jobs or achieve access on terms comparable to those experienced by others. Disability modifications are programmatic changes to structures or policies that increase accessibility. We contend that in the context of mask mandates, modifications rather than accommodations are ethically desirable because modification-oriented policies promote disability access in a way that treats all individuals fairly, avoiding the risk of promoting misinformation and uncertainty about the health benefits of masking.

Mask or No Mask for COVID-19? Do the Individual Characteristics of Governors Affect the Adoption of Statewide Public Mask Mandates?

Public mask mandates are widely recognized as one of the most effective policy tools to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. Across the US, states vary widely in the timeline of adopting a state-level requirement to wear face coverings. Governors play a crucial role in making policy responses to the coronavirus pandemic. Building upon the upper echelons theory, this research explores the determinants of the timing of issuing statewide public mask mandates, focusing on the individual characteristics of state governors. Based on an event history analysis, the study finds that the two characteristics (political ideology and gubernatorial power) of state governor have influenced the time to adoption of statewide public mask mandates. Furthermore, managerial discretion and job demand have a moderating effect on the linkage between the personal traits of state governors and the timeline of adopting public mask mandates.

The Differential Impact of Reopening States With and Without COVID-19 Face Mask Mandates on County-Level Consumer Spending.

OBJECTIVES: By the end of 2020, 38 states and the District of Columbia had issued requirements that people wear face masks when in public settings to counter SARS-CoV-2 transmission. To examine the role face mask mandates played in economic recovery, we analyzed the interactive effect of having a state face mask mandate in place on county-level consumer spending after state reopening, adjusting for county rates of new COVID-19 cases and deaths, time trends, and county-specific effects. METHODS: We collected county-specific data from state executive orders, consumer spending data from the Opportunity Insights Economic Tracker, and COVID-19 case and death data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention COVID-19 tracker. Using an event study approach, we compared county-level changes in consumer spending before and after state-issued closure orders were lifted and assessed the interactive effect of state-issued face mask mandates. RESULTS: The lifting of state-issued closures was associated with an average increase in consumer spending across all counties studied within 1 month. However, the increase was 1.2-1.7 percentage points higher in counties with a state face mask mandate in place than in counties without a state face mask mandate. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to their public health benefits, face mask mandates may have assisted economic recovery during the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting they are a strong public health strategy for policy makers to consider now and for potential future pandemics arising from airborne viruses.

Association of masking policies with mask adherence and distancing during the SARS-COV-2 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Quantification of the impact of local masking policies may help guide future policy interventions to reduce SARS-COV-2 disease transmission. This study's objective was to identify factors associated with adherence to masking and social distancing guidelines. METHODS: Faculty from 16 U.S. colleges and universities trained 231 students in systematic direct observation. They assessed correct mask use and distancing in public settings in 126 US cities from September 2020 through August 2021. RESULTS: Of 109,999 individuals observed in 126 US cities, 48% wore masks correctly with highest adherence among females, teens and seniors and lowest among non-Hispanic whites, those in vigorous physical activity, and in larger groups (P < .0001). Having a local mask mandate increased the odds of wearing a mask by nearly 3-fold (OR = 2.99, P = .0003) compared to no recommendation. People observed in non-commercial areas were least likely to wear masks. Correct mask use was greatest in December 2020 and remained high until June 2021 (P < .0001). Masking policy requirements were not associated with distancing. DISCUSSION: The strong association between mask mandates and correct mask use suggests that public policy has a powerful influence on individual behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Mask mandates should be considered in future pandemics to increase adherence.

COVID-19, green space exposure, and mask mandates.

INTRODUCTION: Mask-wearing and social distancing are critical prevention measures that have been implemented to stem the spread of COVID-19. The degree to which these measures are adhered to in the US, however, may be influenced by access to outdoor resources such as green space, as well as mask mandates that may vary by state. PURPOSE: To examine the association between the presence or absence of statewide mask mandates and green space exposure with COVID-19 cumulative incidence in the US. METHODS: In October 2020, COVID-19 case data for each US county was downloaded from USA Facts, in addition to statewide mask mandates from a database maintained by the American Association of Retired Persons. The Normalized Difference Vegetation Index from the US Geological Survey (USGS), was used as a measure of greenspace, while the 2016 National Land Cover Database was used to assess tree canopy exposure as an alternative measure of greenspace. We performed generalized linear regression to evaluate associations with COVID-19 incidence, adjusting for potential confounders such as other environmental factors (i.e., air pollution and climate) and socio-economic factors derived from the CDC social vulnerability index. In addition, we also performed spatial regression analyses to account for spatial autocorrelation across counties. RESULTS: Counties with mandatory mask-wearing policies had a lower cumulative incidence of COVID-19 (B = -0.299, SE = 0.038). Among environmental factors, precipitation (B = 0.005, SE = 0.001) and PM 2.5 (B = 0.072, SE = 0.012) were associated with a higher incidence of COVID-19, while tree canopy (B = -0.501, SE = 0.129) was associated with a lower risk of COVID-19. COVID-19 incidence was higher in counties with socially vulnerable populations regarding socioeconomic status, minority status, and housing and transportation. CONCLUSION: Mandatory mask regulation, exposure to green space, and reduced exposure to air pollution may reduce COVID-19 incidence in the US. Additional public health policies should consider ways to mitigate environmental conditions that may contribute to the risk of COVID-19, especially for vulnerable populations.

American Women’s Perceptions of Pandemic Policies and Regulations

Objectives: We surveyed 287 American women from April 2020 until the November 2020 presidential election to evaluate their primary news source, beliefs on the constitutionality of mask-wearing and stay-at-home orders, government’s ability to implement public health orders, and political affiliation. Methods: Qualtrics surveys were distributed on social media. Using a chi-square test of independence, we evaluated differences by age groups, ethnicity, and education. Results: Age, ethnicity, and education were all statistically related to beliefs about public health initiatives. Conclusions: These results can help tailor public health interventions, policies, and laws focused on compliance with public health initiatives aimed at reducing the spread of the virus. © 2022, Paris Scholar Publishing. All rights reserved.

The Efficacy of Mask Mandates in Combating the COVID-19 Pandemic

The Coronavirus Disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic took the world by storm and affected the lives of people everywhere. While COVID-19 was a force to be reckoned with, it quickly became a point of contention within the United States. This study covers one of the more controversial aspects of the pandemic in the United States, that is mask wearing. Some states forced its constituents to wear masks immediately, some states waited, and some states never created a mandate at all. This study looks into the difference a mask mandate made in the spread of COVID-19. The study focused on comparing data from states with a mandate against states without a mandate. This study used a data set that provided information on when state mask mandates began and ended compiled by faculty and students from Boston University while the data set for the COVID-19 cases and deaths used in this study came from the Center for Disease Control (CDC). This study showed that masks were effective in reducing the spread of COVID-19. © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Effect of Mask Mandates on the Intraocular Pressure Measured via Goldmann Applanation Tonometry

Purpose: The corona virus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in mandatory masking of patients and physicians during outpatient visits. This study evaluated the changes in intraocular pressure (IOP) according to mask use. Methods: This prospective study enrolled 30 healthy volunteers (60 eyes). IOP was measured via Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) for the subjects wearing one of four commonly used masks: dental, bi-folding Korean Filter (KF)94, tri-folding KF94, and dust masks. Subjects with IOP measurement errors of more than 5 mmHg were rechecked with another GAT type. Results: The mean IOP measured via GAT before mask wearing was 13.7 +/- 1.7 mmHg. It was 13.5 +/- 2.1, 14.0 +/- 2.3, 14.3 +/- 2.5, and 13.8 +/- 1.6 mmHg with the dental, bi-folding KF94, tri-folding KF94, and dust masks, respectively. There were no significant differences in IOP according to mask type (p = 0.635). IOP errors above 5 mmHg were detected in three subjects who had contact between the GAT feeler arm and tri-folding KF94 mask during IOP measurement. Conclusions: The IOP as measured via GAT is artificially elevated by mechanical interference from the tri-fold KF94 mask. To minimize such mask-induced artifacts in GAT measurements, compress the patient's mask or change the mask type to prevent any contact during measurement.

Public responses to COVID-19 mask mandates: examining pro and anti-Mask anger in tweets before and after state-level mandates

Governmental mandates requiring mask wearing in public spaces to slow the spread of the COVID-19 virus have been controversial in the United States. We test theory related to anger and anger expression in the context of posts about masks appearing on Twitter during a 12-week period in which mask mandates were adopted in 18 states. The results were consistent with an appraisal of mandates as providing protection from harm. Pro-mask anger directed at others for not wearing masks increased following the imposition of mandates among tweets originating from states with a mandate. In states without a mandate, pro-mask anger similarly increased over time as additional state mandates were adopted across the country. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Communication Monographs is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd 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.)

Mask Wearing and Perceived Discrimination Associated With COVID-19 in the United States From March 2020 to May 2021: Three-Level Longitudinal Analyses.

Although mask wearing has been demonstrated to be an effective strategy to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become a contentious issue. This is evident in the policy shift regarding mask wearing during the pandemic and the varying mask mandates across different states in the United States. This study investigates the relationship between mask wearing and COVID-19-associated discrimination (CAD) over the course of the pandemic (March 2020 through May 2021), and differences between states with and without mask mandates. This study utilized three-level longitudinal analyses to analyze a longitudinal panel data from a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults enrolled in the Understanding America Study (UAS). The experiences of CAD were much higher for those wearing a mask than those not wearing a mask before August 2020, but this pattern was reversed afterward. Another notable finding was that mask wearers reported greater CAD in states with no mask-wearing mandate than the ones in states with mask mandates. In contrast, the pattern was reversed for nonmask wearers. The findings highlight the importance of inclusiveness and openness when relatively new health practice is introduced during a public health crisis.

Mask Mandates and COVID-19 Related Symptoms in the US.

PURPOSE: This study investigates the extent to which the Public Mask Mandate, a policy that requires the use of face masks in public, can protect people from developing COVID-19 symptoms during the initial stage of the pandemic from mid-April to early June 2020 in the United States (US). METHODS: We employ the difference-in-differences model that exploits the differential timing of the mask mandate implementation across states. RESULTS: Our findings show that the Public Mask Mandate significantly lowers the incidence of developing all COVID-19 symptoms by 0.29 percentage points. The estimate implies an average reduction of 290%, compared to the proportion of the mandate-unaffected individuals who display all symptoms (0.1%). CONCLUSION: The study provides suggestive evidence for the health benefits of wearing masks in public in the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic. The study also highlights the relevance of public mask wearing for the ongoing pandemic where the vaccination rate is precarious and access to vaccines is still limited in many countries.

Face masks, public policies and slowing the spread of COVID-19: Evidence from Canada.

We estimate the impact of indoor face mask mandates and other non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) on COVID-19 case growth in Canada. Mask mandate introduction was staggered from mid-June to mid-August 2020 in the 34 public health regions in Ontario, Canada's largest province by population. Using this variation, we find that mask mandates are associated with a 22 percent weekly reduction in new COVID-19 cases, relative to the trend in absence of mandate. Province-level data provide corroborating evidence. We control for mobility behaviour using Google geo-location data and for lagged case totals and case growth as information variables. Our analysis of additional survey data shows that mask mandates led to an increase of about 27 percentage points in self-reported mask wearing in public. Counterfactual policy simulations suggest that adopting a nationwide mask mandate in June could have reduced the total number of diagnosed COVID-19 cases in Canada by over 50,000 over the period July-November 2020. Jointly, our results indicate that mandating mask wearing in indoor public places can be a powerful policy tool to slow the spread of COVID-19.