Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The effect of eye protection on SARS-CoV-2 transmission: a systematic review
Oyungerel Byambasuren; Elaine Beller; Justin Clark; Peter Collignon; Paul Glasziou.
Afiliação
  • Oyungerel Byambasuren; Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University
  • Elaine Beller; Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond university
  • Justin Clark; Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond university
  • Peter Collignon; Australian National University
  • Paul Glasziou; Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond university
Preprint em Inglês | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21261770
Artigo de periódico
Um artigo publicado em periódico científico está disponível e provavelmente é baseado neste preprint, por meio do reconhecimento de similaridade realizado por uma máquina. A confirmação humana ainda está pendente.
Ver artigo de periódico
ABSTRACT
BackgroundThe effect of eye protection to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in the real-world remains uncertain. We aimed to synthesize all available research on the potential impact of eye protection on transmission of SARS-CoV-2. MethodsWe searched PROSPERO, PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library for clinical trials and comparative observational studies in CENTRAL, and Europe PMC for pre-prints. We included studies that reported sufficient data to estimate the effect of any form of eye protection including face shields and variants, goggles, and glasses, on subsequent confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2. FindingsWe screened 898 articles and included 6 reports of 5 observational studies from 4 countries (USA, India, Columbia, and United Kingdom) that tested face shields, googles and wraparound eyewear on 7567 healthcare workers. The three before-and-after and one retrospective cohort studies showed statistically significant and substantial reductions in SARS-CoV-2 infections favouring eye protection with odds ratios ranging from 0.04 to 0.6, corresponding to relative risk reductions of 96% to 40%. These reductions were not explained by changes in the community rates. However, the one case-control study reported odds ratio favouring no eye protection (OR 1.7, 95% CI 0.99, 3.0). The high heterogeneity between studies precluded any meaningful meta-analysis. None of the studies adjusted for potential confounders such as other protective behaviours, thus increasing the risk of bias, and decreasing the certainty of evidence to very low. InterpretationCurrent studies suggest that eye protection may play a role in prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers. However, robust comparative trials are needed to clearly determine effectiveness of eye protections and wearability issues in both healthcare and general populations. FundingThere was no funding source for this study. All authors had full access to all data and agreed to final manuscript to be submitted for publication.
Licença
cc_by_nc_nd
Texto completo: Disponível Coleções: Preprints Base de dados: medRxiv Tipo de estudo: Cohort_studies / Experimental_studies / Estudo observacional / Estudo prognóstico / Review / Revisão sistemática Idioma: Inglês Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Preprint
Texto completo: Disponível Coleções: Preprints Base de dados: medRxiv Tipo de estudo: Cohort_studies / Experimental_studies / Estudo observacional / Estudo prognóstico / Review / Revisão sistemática Idioma: Inglês Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Preprint
...