Effect of an N95 respirator and a surgical mask-covered N95 on the cardiovascular responses of dentists treating paediatric patients: A crossover clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The studies on cardiovascular alterations when using an N95 respirator or surgical mask-covered N95 during dental treatments are limited. AIM: To investigate and compare the cardiovascular responses of dentists treating paediatric patients while wearing an N95 respirator or a surgical mask-covered N95. DESIGN: This was a crossover clinical trial in 18 healthy dentists wearing an N95 respirator or surgical mask-covered N95 during the dental treatment of paediatric patients. Oxygen saturation (SpO2 ), heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were monitored at baseline, intraoperation, and postoperation. The data were analyzed using the generalized estimating equation. RESULTS: The mean SpO2 , HR, SBP, DBP, and MAP significantly changed from baseline up to the end of the procedures after wearing an N95 by 3.1%, 19.3%, 11.5%, 17.7%, and 13.8% and after wearing a surgical mask-covered N95 by 3.0%, 20.2%, 5.3%, 13.9%, and 8.8%, respectively (p < .05). No significant differences in these values were found between groups (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: N95 respirators and surgical mask-covered N95s significantly impact the cardiovascular responses of dentists treating paediatric patients with no differences between the two types of masks.

Influence of N95 Mask-related Hypoxemia on Headache, Stress, Anxiety, and Quality of Sleep during COVID-19 Patient Care among Frontline Health Care Professionals.

BACKGROUND: Prolonged use of N95 masks by healthcare workers might affect physical health due to mask-related hypoxia in addition to the psychological effects of N95 masks. We tried to explore the association of N95 mask-related hypoxia and headache with stress, quality of sleep, and anxiety in the current study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The sample (N = 78) consisted of 41 doctors and 37 nurses involved in COVID-19 patient care and using N95 masks with or without PPE for at least 4 hours. Perceived stress scale (PSS), Coronavirus anxiety scale (CAS), and Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI) were administered, and physical parameters like heart rate and oxygen saturation (SpO2) were measured. RESULTS: Around 42% of the study participants experienced headaches after wearing an N95 mask and had a higher increase in heart rate (mean percent:10.5% vs 6.3%) and decline in SpO2 (mean percent: 2.6% vs 1.5%) compared to those who didn't develop a headache after N95 mask use. Independent samples t-test showed a mean difference for PSS and CAS between those who experienced headaches and those who didn't. The mean PSQI scores among the study participants were 8.91 ± 5.78; the score among those participants with and without headache was 10.57 ± 3.11 and 7.68 ± 2.53, respectively. CONCLUSION: Perceived corona anxiety, poor sleep quality, and corona anxiety are associated with N95-related headaches and SpO2 drop among health professionals who wear N95 masks for at least 4 hours.

Contact allergy investigations in healthcare workers with face mask-related skin disease.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of face masks has increased among healthcare workers (HCWs). Questionnaire studies have shown a high frequency of self-reported facial adverse skin reactions. Case reports have been published on face mask-induced allergic contact dermatitis and urticaria. OBJECTIVES: To describe the results of the contact allergy investigations in consecutive HCWs investigated for skin reactions to face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic and the results of the chemical investigations of face masks supplied by the hospital. METHODS: Participants were patch tested with baseline series and chemicals previously reported in face masks not included in the baseline series. Face mask(s) brought by the HCW were tested as is and/or in acetone extract. Chemical analyses were performed on nine different face masks for potential allergens. RESULTS: Fifty-eight HCWs were investigated. No contact allergies were found to the face mask(s) tested. Eczema was the most common type of skin reaction, followed by an acneiform reaction. Colophonium-related substances were found in one respirator and 2,6-di-t-butyl-4-methylphenol (BHT) were found in two respirators. CONCLUSION: Based on this report, contact allergies to face masks is uncommon. Patch test with colophonium-related substances and BHT should be considered when investigating adverse skin reactions to face masks.

Changes in Infection Prevention Practices and Occurrence of Skin Symptoms among Healthcare Workers, Cleaners and Day-care Workers in Norway during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in increased attention on infection prevention measures. This study aims to assess whether changes in hand hygiene procedures, use of personal protective equipment and moisturizers during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with changes in the occurrence of skin symptoms among healthcare workers, cleaners, and day-care workers. A total of 602 participants (40%) responded to an electronic questionnaire, including questions on previous and current occupational exposure and skin problems. Increased frequency of hand washing, use of hand disinfectants, use of disposable gloves and moisturizers were all associated with an increased symptom score on the hands, wrists, forearms. Participants who increased their use of masks or respirators had a higher risk of facial skin symptoms, compared with those with non-increased occupational exposure. In conclusion, a change of behaviour among healthcare workers, cleaners and day-care workers during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, with an increase in occupational exposures and use of moisturizers, was associated with higher occurrence of facial skin symptoms and symptoms on the hands, wrists and forearms.

Face mask use and effects on the ocular surface health: A comprehensive review.

In the COVID-19 period, face masks increased exponentially. Several studies suggest that the rise in ocular discomfort symptoms during the pandemic is mostly part of dry eye disease and that these are due to the effect of face masks, resulting in the newly described term MADE, for "mask-associated dry eye". The most commonly proposed mechanism states that wearing a face mask creates an unnatural upward airflow towards the ocular surface during expiration, although the increased temperature, humidity and levels of carbon dioxide of the exhaled air, stress, increased use of video display terminals, as well as changes in the ocular microbiota may contribute. Evidence supports that the use of face masks causes an increase in dry eye disease symptoms, a decreased tear break-up time, corneal epithelial trauma, periocular temperature changes and inflammatory markers secretion. Given that the use of masks may be frequent in some settings in the near future, it is important to establish its effects and consequences on the ocular surface.

A Cloth Facemask Causes No Major Respiratory or Cardiovascular Perturbations During Moderate to Heavy Exercise.

PURPOSE: Investigate whether a cloth facemask could affect physiological and perceptual responses to exercise at distinct exercise intensities in untrained individuals. METHODS: Healthy participants (n = 35; 17 men, age 30 [4] y, and 18 women, age 28 [5] y) underwent a progressive square wave test at 4 intensities: (1) 80% of ventilatory anaerobic threshold; (2) ventilatory anaerobic threshold; (3) respiratory compensation point; and (4) exercise peak (Peak) to exhaustion, 5-minute stages, with or without a triple-layered cloth facemask (Mask or No-Mask). Several physiological and perceptual measures were analyzed. RESULTS: Mask reduced inspiratory capacity at all exercise intensities (P < .0001). Mask reduced respiratory frequency (P = .001) at Peak (-8.3 breaths·min-1; 95% confidence interval [CI], -5.8 to -10.8), respiratory compensation point (-6.9 breaths·min-1; 95% CI, -4.6 to -9.2), and ventilatory anaerobic threshold (-6.5 breaths·min-1; 95% CI, -4.1 to -8.8), but not at Baseline or 80% of ventilatory anaerobic threshold. Mask reduced tidal volume (P < .0001) only at respiratory compensation point (-0.5 L; 95% CI, -0.3 to -0.6) and Peak (-0.8 L; 95% CI, -0.6 to -0.9). Shallow breathing index was increased with Mask only at Peak (11.3; 95% CI, 7.5 to 15.1). Mask did not change HR, lactate, ratings of perceived exertion, blood pressure, or oxygen saturation. CONCLUSIONS: A cloth facemask reduced time to exhaustion but had no major impact on cardiorespiratory parameters and had a slight but clinically meaningless impact on respiratory variables at higher intensities. Moderate to heavy activity is safe and tolerable for healthy individuals while wearing a cloth facemask. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT04887714.

Challenging Times for Cochlear Implant Users - Effect of Face Masks on Audiovisual Speech Understanding during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Unhindered auditory and visual signals are essential for a sufficient speech understanding of cochlear implant (CI) users. Face masks are an important hygiene measurement against the COVID-19 virus but disrupt these signals. This study determinates the extent and the mechanisms of speech intelligibility alteration in CI users caused by different face masks. The audiovisual German matrix sentence test was used to determine speech reception thresholds (SRT) in noise in different conditions (audiovisual, audio-only, speechreading and masked audiovisual using two different face masks). Thirty-seven CI users and ten normal-hearing listeners (NH) were included. CI users showed a reduction in speech reception threshold of 5.0 dB due to surgical mask and 6.5 dB due to FFP2 mask compared to the audiovisual condition without mask. The greater proportion of reduction in SRT by mask could be accounted for by the loss of the visual signal (up to 4.5 dB). The effect of each mask was significantly larger in CI users who exclusively hear with their CI (surgical: 7.8 dB, p = 0.005 and FFP2: 8.7 dB, p = 0.01) compared to NH (surgical: 3.8 dB and FFP2: 5.1 dB). This study confirms that CI users who exclusively rely on their CI for hearing are particularly susceptible. Therefore, visual signals should be made accessible for communication whenever possible, especially when communicating with CI users.

The Adverse and Advantage Effects of Wearing a Facemask in Thai Children: A Survey During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: There is little information on facemask use during the COVID-19 pandemic in the pediatric population. This became the main purpose of the present study to investigate demographic data of facemask wearing in children, types, and length of facemask, as well as the benefits, drawbacks, and negative consequences of facemask wearing in this population. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a structured questionnaire sent via Google Forms. Caregivers for consecutive convenience were asked in the survey (parents of children under the age of 18). RESULTS: A total number of 706 children were enrolled. There were 320 boys (45.33%), and 386 girls (54.67%). The children's ages range between 4 months and 18 years, with a median age of 9 years. A surgical mask (549, 77.76%) was the most frequent type of facemask in the study population, followed by a cloth mask (86, 12.18%). Facemasks have been shown to be beneficial in the pediatric population. When compared to a former time when facemasks were not used routinely, there were considerably fewer respiratory infections, reduced diarrhea symptoms, and a drop in hospital admissions. In 317 cases (44.9%), children were shown to have negative consequences from wearing facemasks. The most prevalent adverse effect observed in the study population was non-cutaneous (respiratory discomfort/breathing difficulty) which were found in 240 cases (33.99%). Double masking method (surgical + surgical) and wearing a facemask oversize revealed a higher risk in the presence of facemask adverse effects, whereas wearing a proper size facemask reduces the risk of adverse effects from facemask use in children (Adjusted OR [95% CI] = 0.55 [0.38-0.78], P .0003). CONCLUSIONS: Wearing a proper-size facemask reduces the risk of adverse effects from facemask use in children. The future suggestion of an appropriate facemask size for a certain age will aid in the avoidance of facemask adverse effects in the pediatric population.

Masks trigger facial seborrheic dermatitis and psoriasis: evidence from a multicenter, case-control study during COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Wearing masks is an optimal preventive strategy during COVID-19 pandemic, but it may increase facial sebum production. However, few case reports have described seborrheic dermatitis (SeBD) and psoriasis (PsO) flares due to masks. Hence, we conducted a multicenter study to clarify the possibility of increased SeBD and PsO flares in association with mask wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This multicenter study enrolled patients with a diagnosis of facial SeBD and PsO. All dermatological consultations were conducted in teledermatology at baseline (T0) and after 1 month (T1) Of >6 hours/day wearing mask. PsO patients were assessed using PsO Area and Severity Index (PASI) and self-administered PASI (SAPASI), whilst SeBD patients with symptom scale of seborrheic dermatitis' (SSSD) and seborrheic dermatitis area and severity index (SEDASI). RESULTS: A total of 33 (20 males, 13 females, average age 43.61±9.86) patients with PsO and 33 (20 males, 13 females, average age 44.00±8.58) with SeBD were enrolled. After 1 month, PsO patients displayed higher values of both PASI and SAPASI (P<0.0001), while SeBD patients experienced a flare, as testified by the increment of both SSSD and SEDASI (P<0.0001). Mask type did not seem to influence the flare severity. CONCLUSIONS: Masks remain an optimal preventive strategy during COVID-19 pandemic, but patients with PsO and SeBD may experience facial flares. Thus, therapeutic approach should be more aggressive in these groups of patients to counteract the triggering effect of masks.

Assessing the consequences of prolonged usage of disposable face masks.

Due to the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, wearing a disposable face mask has become a worldwide daily routine, not only for medical operators or specialized personnel, but also for common people. Notwithstanding the undeniable positive effect in reducing the risk of virus transmission, it is important to understand if a prolonged usage of the same face mask can have effectiveness on filtering capability and potential health consequences. To this aim, we present three investigations. A survey, carried out in central Italy, offers an overview of the distorted public awareness of face mask usage. A functional study shows how prolonged wearing leads to substantial drops in humid air filtration efficiency. Finally, a morphological analysis reports the proliferation of fungal or bacteria colonies inside an improperly used mask. Our study highlights therefore that wearing a face mask is really beneficial only if it is used correctly.

Health hazards related to using masks and/or personal protective equipment among physicians working in public hospitals in Dhaka: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Wearing masks or personal protective equipment (PPE) has become an integral part of the occupational life of physicians due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Most physicians have been developing various health hazards related to the use of different protective gears. This study aimed to determine the burden and spectrum of various health hazards associated with using masks or PPE and their associated risk factors. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey was conducted in Dhaka Medical College from March 01-May 30, 2021, among physicians from different public hospitals in Dhaka, Bangladesh. We analyzed the responses of 506 physicians who completed case record forms through Google forms or hard copies. FINDINGS: The mean (SD) age of the respondents was 35.4 [7.7], and 69.4% were men. Approximately 40% were using full PPE, and 55% were using N-95 masks. A total of 489 (96.6%) patients experienced at least one health hazard. The reported severe health hazards were syncope, severe dyspnea, severe chest pain, and anaphylaxis. Headache, dizziness, mood irritation, chest pain, excessive sweating, panic attack, and permanent facial disfigurement were the minor health hazards reported. Extended periods of work in the COVID-19-unit, reuse of masks, diabetes, obesity, and mental stress were risk factors for dyspnea. The risk factors for headaches were female sex, diabetes, and previous primary headaches. Furthermore, female sex and reusing masks for an extended period (> 6 h) were risk factors for facial disfigurement. The risk factors for excessive sweating were female sex and additional evening office practice for an extended period. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare workers experienced several occupational hazards after using masks and PPE. Therefore, an appropriate policy is required to reduce such risks.

Prevalence of dermatological manifestations due to face mask use and its associated factors during COVID-19 among the general population of Bangladesh: A nationwide cross-sectional survey.

Following the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic, individuals have begun to take preventive measures to avoid exposure. Among the precautionary measures, facemask was mostly emphasized. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of dermatological symptoms linked with face mask usage and explore other associated factors. This cross-sectional survey was conducted throughout all eight divisions of Bangladesh. 1297 people were approached using a fixed-step procedure on a random route sample where 803 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The overall prevalence of dermatological manifestation in this study was 40.85%. The common dermatological manifestations due to facemasks use were acne (26%), allergy symptoms (24%), traumatic symptoms (24%), and other symptoms (26%). Two important frequently reported risk factors were previous history of skin diseases and obesity. Females were more likely to have acne (CI: 1.199, 3.098; p = .007) and allergy issues (CI: 1.042, 2.359; p = .031). N95 and KN95 masks were more likely to produce allergic symptoms, while surgical mask users were more likely to develop acne. Acne was prevalent more than twice (CI: 1.42, 4.26; p = 0.001) in persons with a COVID-19 infection history. Further exploration is required to find out the reason. Surgical mask users reported more complaints than other types of masks, and prolonged use caused more skin symptoms. Modifications in the pattern of facemask usage and planning for work recesses might also be advised to provide for a pause from uninterrupted facemask use.

Ocular Trauma During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to summarize the latest literature on the trends and incidence of ocular trauma during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted to identify the relevant literature. The search period was between January 1, 2020, and September 20, 2021. The incidence of overall and various types of ocular trauma during the COVID-19 pandemic and the control period was analyzed. The data from different studies were pooled. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 32 articles were included. After pooling the data from all included studies, the incidence of total and pediatric ocular trauma during the COVID-19 pandemic was 67.7% and 54.3% of those in the control period, respectively. However, the proportion of ocular trauma in eye emergency visits increased during the pandemic (OR, 95% CI: 1.46, 1.04-2.06). The proportion of domestic ocular trauma increased (OR, 95% CI: 3.42, 1.01-11.62), while ocular trauma related to sports and outdoor activities and occupational ocular trauma decreased (OR, 95% CI: 0.64, 0.09-4.29 and 0.18, 0.10-0.33, respectively). It was also reported that chemical injury caused by alcohol-based sanitizers, photokeratitis caused by ultraviolet lamps, and mechanical eye injury caused by masks increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: There was a reduction in overall eye injuries and substantial differences in the spectrum of ocular trauma during the COVID-19 pandemic. Proper health education and supervision should be strengthened to prevent ocular injuries related to COVID-19 preventive interventions.

Facial dermatoses induced by face masks: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

The use of masks for infection control was common in the COVID-19 pandemic. As numerous cross-sectional studies have suggested a link between the use of such masks and various facial dermatoses, a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies was conducted to evaluate this association, as well as potential risk factors for the development of such facial dermatoses. Observational studies were searched for in MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register. Thirty-seven observational studies with a total of 29 557 study participants were identified. This study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist and quality was assessed via the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale., Overall prevalence of facial dermatoses was 55%. Individually, acne, facial dermatitis, itch and pressure injuries were consistently reported as facial dermatoses, with a pooled prevalence of 31%, 24%, 30% and 31%, respectively. Duration of mask-wear was the most significant risk factor for the development of facial dermatoses (95% CI: 1.31-1.54, p < 0.001). Overall, facial dermatoses associated with mask wear are common, and consist of distinct entities. They are related to duration of use. Appropriate and tailored treatment is important to improve the outcomes for these affected patients.

A practical test of the link between perceived identifiability and prosociality with two field studies.

Covering the face with masks in public settings has been recommended since the start of the pandemic. Because faces provide information about identity, and that face masks hide a portion of the face, it is plausible to expect individuals who wear a mask to consider themselves less identifiable. Prior research suggests that perceived identifiability is positively related to prosocial behavior, and with two pre-registered field studies (total N = 5706) we provide a currently relevant and practical test of this relation. Our findings indicate that mask wearers and non-wearers display equivalent levels of helping behavior (Studies 1 and 2), although mask wearers have a lower level of perceived identifiability than those without a mask (Study 2). Overall, our findings suggest that claims that face masks are related to selfish behavior are not warranted, and that there is no practical link between perceived identifiability and prosocial behavior.

Diurnal changes of noninvasive parameters of ocular surface in healthy subjects before and after continuous face mask wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

To investigate whether diurnal changes in noninvasive ocular surface parameters and subjective symptoms occur in healthy subjects wearing face mask who were analyzed before and after 8 h of continuous use. In this prospective cross-sectional study, healthy volunteers attending the same workplace environment underwent a noninvasive ocular surface workup by means of Keratograph 5 M (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) in the same day at 2 different time points: (i) in the early morning before wearing face mask (T0); (ii) after 8 h of continuous face mask use (T1). Noninvasive break-up time (NIBUT), tear meniscus height (TMH), ocular redness and meibomian gland dropout were measured. All subjects were asked to complete the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire before and after 8 h of face mask wearing. Data from 20 healthy subjects (10 males and 10 females, mean age 25.1 ± 3.9 years) were included. Mean value of TMH decreased significantly from 0.29 ± 0.07 at T0 to 0.23 ± 0.07 mm at T1 (P < 0.001); conversely, mean values of NIBUT, redness score and meibomian gland dropout did not change significantly after continuous face mask wearing (always P > 0.532). Concerning ocular discomfort symptoms, mean value of OSDI score worsened significantly at T1 compared to T0 (from 12.9 ± 12.6 to 19.4 ± 12.0; P = 0.017). Continuous face mask wearing for 8 h led to decreased TMH associated with the onset of ocular discomfort symptoms in young healthy subjects.