Effectiveness and safety of measures to prevent infections and other complications associated with peripheral intravenous catheters: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) contribute substantially to the global burden of infections. This systematic review assessed 24 infection prevention and control (IPC) interventions to prevent PIVC-associated infections and other complications. METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, WHO Global Index Medicus, CINAHL and reference lists for controlled studies, from January 1, 1980-March 16, 2023. We dually selected studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data, and rated the certainty of evidence (COE). For outcomes with three or more trials, we conducted Bayesian random-effects meta-analyses. RESULTS: 105 studies met our prespecified eligibility criteria, addressing 16 of the 24 research questions; no studies were identified for eight research questions.Based on findings of low to high COE, wearing gloves reduced the risk for overall adverse events related to insertion compared to no gloves (one non-randomised controlled trial [RCT]; adjusted risk ratio [RR]: 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.33-0.85), and catheter removal based on defined schedules potentially resulted in a lower phlebitis/thrombophlebitis incidence (10 RCTs; RR: 0.74, 95% credible interval 0.49-1.01) compared to clinically indicated removal in adults. In neonates, chlorhexidine reduced the phlebitis score compared to non-chlorhexidine-containing disinfection (one RCT; 0.14 versus 0.68, p = 0.003). No statistically significant differences were found for other measures. CONCLUSIONS: Despite their frequent use and concern about PIVC-associated complications, this review underscores the urgent need for more high-quality studies on effective IPC methods regarding safe PIVC management. In the absence of valid evidence, adherence to standard precaution measures and documentation remain the most important principles to curb PIVC complications.

Erratum: Considerations for de-escalating universal masking in healthcare centers - CORRIGENDUM.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1017/ash.2023.200.].

Considerations for de-escalating universal masking in healthcare centers.

Three years after the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, better knowledge on the transmission of respiratory viral infections (RVI) including the contribution of asymptomatic infections encouraged most healthcare centers to implement universal masking. The evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemiology and improved immunization of the population call for the infection and prevention control community to revisit the masking strategy in healthcare. In this narrative review, we consider factors for de-escalating universal masking in healthcare centers, addressing compliance with the mask policy, local epidemiology, the level of protection provided by medical face masks, the consequences of absenteeism and presenteeism, as well as logistics, costs, and ecological impact. Most current national and international guidelines for mask use are based on the level of community transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Actions are now required to refine future recommendations, such as establishing a list of the most relevant RVI to consider, implement reliable local RVI surveillance, and define thresholds for activating masking strategies. Considering the epidemiological context (measured via sentinel networks or wastewater analysis), and, if not available, considering a time period (winter season) may guide to three gradual levels of masking: (i) standard and transmission-based precautions and respiratory etiquette, (ii) systematic face mask wearing when in direct contact with patients, and (iii) universal masking. Cost-effectiveness analysis of the different strategies is warranted in the coming years. Masking is just one element to be considered along with other preventive measures such as staff and patient immunization, and efficient ventilation.

Revisiting the personal protective equipment components of transmission-based precautions for the prevention of COVID-19 and other respiratory virus infections in healthcare.

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted some potential limitations of transmission-based precautions. The distinction between transmission through large droplets vs aerosols, which have been fundamental concepts guiding infection control measures, has been questioned, leading to considerable variation in expert recommendations on transmission-based precautions for COVID-19. Furthermore, the application of elements of contact precautions, such as the use of gloves and gowns, is based on low-quality and inconclusive evidence and may have unintended consequences, such as increased incidence of healthcare-associated infections and spread of multidrug-resistant organisms. These observations indicate a need for high-quality studies to address the knowledge gaps and a need to revisit the theoretical background regarding various modes of transmission and the definitions of terms related to transmission. Further, we should examine the implications these definitions have on the following components of transmission-based precautions: (i) respiratory protection, (ii) use of gloves and gowns for the prevention of respiratory virus infections, (iii) aerosol-generating procedures and (iv) universal masking in healthcare settings as a control measure especially during seasonal epidemics. Such a review would ensure that transmission-based precautions are consistent and rationally based on available evidence, which would facilitate decision-making, guidance development and training, as well as their application in practice.

Parallel dynamics in the yield of universal SARS-CoV-2 admission screening and population incidence.

The majority of SARS-CoV-2 transmissions originates from either asymptomatic or presymptomatic individuals. To prevent unnoticed introduction of SARS-CoV-2, many hospitals have implemented universal admission screening during the COVID-19 pandemic. The present study aimed to investigate associations between results of an universal SARS-CoV-2 admission screening and public SARS-CoV-2 incidence. Over a study period of 44 weeks, all patients admitted to a large tertiary care hospital were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction. SARS-CoV-2 positive patients were retrospectively categorized as symptomatic or asymptomatic at admission. Cantonal data were used to calculate weekly incidence rates per 100,000 inhabitants. We used regression models for count data to assess the association of the weekly cantonal incidence rate and the proportion of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests in the canton with (a) the proportion of SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals and (b) the proportion of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals identified in universal admission screening, respectively. In a 44-week period, a total of 21,508 admission screenings were performed. SARS-CoV-2 PCR was positive in 643 (3.0%) individuals. In 97 (15.0%) individuals, the positive PCR reflected residual viral replication after recent COVID-19, 469 (72.9%) individuals had COVID-19 symptoms and 77 (12.0%) SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals were asymptomatic. Cantonal incidence correlated with the proportion of SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals [rate ratio (RR): 2.03 per 100 point increase of weekly incidence rate, 95%CI 1.92-2.14] and the proportion of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals (RR: 2.40 per 100 point increase of weekly incidence rate, 95%CI 2.03-2.82). The highest correlation between dynamics in cantonal incidence and results of admission screening was observed at a lag time of one week. Similarly, the proportion of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests in the canton of Zurich correlated with the proportion of SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals (RR: 2.86 per log increase in the proportion of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests in the canton, 95%CI 2.56-3.19) and the proportion of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals (RR: 6.50 per log increase in the proportion of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests in the canton, 95%CI 3.93-10.75) in admission screening. Around 0.36% of admission screenings were positive in asymptomatic patients. Admission screening results paralleled changes in population incidence with a brief lag.

Associated deaths and disability-adjusted life-years caused by infections with antibiotic-resistant bacteria in Switzerland, 2010 to 2019.

BackgroundCassini et al. (2019) estimated that, in 2015, infections with 16 different antibiotic-resistant bacteria resulted in ca 170 disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) per 100,000 population in the European Union and European Economic area (EU/EEA). The corresponding estimate for Switzerland was about half of this (87.8 DALYs per 100,000 population) but still higher than that of several EU/EEA countries (e.g. neighbouring Austria (77.2)).AimIn this study, the burden caused by the same infections due to antibiotic-resistant bacteria ('AMR burden') in Switzerland from 2010 to 2019 was estimated and the effect of the factors 'linguistic region' and 'hospital type' on this estimate was examined.MethodsNumber of infections, DALYs and deaths were estimated according to Cassini et al. (2019) whereas separate models were built for each linguistic region/hospital type combination.ResultsDALYs increased significantly from 3,995 (95% uncertainty interval (UI): 3;327-4,805) in 2010 to 6,805 (95% UI: 5,820-7,949) in 2019. Linguistic region and hospital type stratifications significantly affected the absolute values and the slope of the total AMR burden estimates. DALYs per population were higher in the Latin part of Switzerland (98 DALYs per 100,000 population; 95% UI: 83-115) compared with the German part (57 DALYs per 100,000 population; 95% UI: 49-66) and in university hospitals (165 DALYs per 100,000 hospitalisation days; 95% UI: 140-194) compared with non-university hospitals (62 DALYs per 100,000 hospitalisation days; 95% UI: 53-72).ConclusionsThe AMR burden estimate in Switzerland has increased significantly between 2010 and 2019. Considerable differences depending on the linguistic region and the hospital type were identified - a finding which affects the nationwide burden estimation.

Best practice in the use of peripheral venous catheters: A scoping review and expert consensus.

Background: Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are the most commonly used invasive medical device in health care with an overall failure rate of 35-50%. Most complications are non-infectious, but local site and bloodstream infections can also occur. Even if PIVC-related infections are rare, the total number of affected patients and the preponderance of Staphylococcus aureus as related pathogen due to the frequent use of these devices are relevant arguments to implement preventive strategies. The aim of this document is to raise awareness that infections caused by PIVCs are a relevant problem that can be reduced by practice change. Methods: A panel of experts discussed this topic based on evidence and proposed practice points by consensus. Discussion: Despite published evidence-based guidelines, current practice concerning aseptic techniques during insertion and care of PIVCs often are substandard. These devices have become commonplace and tend to be perceived as safe. An overall lack of awareness about the true risks associated with the use of PIVCs results in limited surveillance and prevention efforts. Conclusion: Successful insertion and maintenance bundles in central venous lines are a blueprint to the implementation of adapted bundle strategies in the prevention of PIVC-associated infections. There is a need for studies to specifically investigate infection prevention in PIVCs and to agree on effective and implementable bundles.

Hand hygiene improvement of individual healthcare workers: results of the multicentre PROHIBIT study.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, hand hygiene (HH) interventions do not identify the observed healthcare workers (HWCs) and therefore, reflect HH compliance only at population level. Intensive care units (ICUs) in seven European hospitals participating in the "Prevention of Hospital Infections by Intervention and Training" (PROHIBIT) study provided individual HH compliance levels. We analysed these to understand the determinants and dynamics of individual change in relation to the overall intervention effect. METHODS: We included HCWs who contributed at least two observation sessions before and after intervention. Improving, non-changing, and worsening HCWs were defined with a threshold of 20% compliance change. We used multivariable linear regression and spearman's rank correlation to estimate determinants for the individual response to the intervention and correlation to overall change. Swarm graphs visualized ICU-specific patterns. RESULTS: In total 280 HCWs contributed 17,748 HH opportunities during 2677 observation sessions. Overall, pooled HH compliance increased from 43.1 to 58.7%. The proportion of improving HCWs ranged from 33 to 95% among ICUs. The median HH increase per improving HCW ranged from 16 to 34 percentage points. ICU wide improvement correlated significantly with both the proportion of improving HCWs (ρ = 0.82 [95% CI 0.18-0.97], and their median HH increase (ρ = 0.79 [0.08-0.97]). Multilevel regression demonstrated that individual improvement was significantly associated with nurse profession, lower activity index, higher nurse-to-patient ratio, and lower baseline compliance. CONCLUSIONS: Both the proportion of improving HCWs and their median individual improvement differed substantially among ICUs but correlated with the ICUs' overall HH improvement. With comparable overall means the range in individual HH varied considerably between some hospitals, implying different transmission risks. Greater insight into improvement dynamics might help to design more effective HH interventions in the future.

On-Site Quantification and Infection Risk Assessment of Airborne SARS-CoV-2 Virus Via a Nanoplasmonic Bioaerosol Sensing System in Healthcare Settings.

On-site quantification and early-stage infection risk assessment of airborne severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) with high spatiotemporal resolution is a promising approach for mitigating the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and informing life-saving decisions. Here, a condensation (hygroscopic growth)-assisted bioaerosol collection and plasmonic photothermal sensing (CAPS) system for on-site quantitative risk analysis of SARS-CoV-2 virus-laden aerosols is presented. The CAPS system provided rapid thermoplasmonic biosensing results after an aerosol-to-hydrosol sampling process in COVID-19-related environments including a hospital and a nursing home. The detection limit reached 0.25 copies/µL in the complex aerosol background without further purification. More importantly, the CAPS system enabled direct measurement of the SARS-CoV-2 virus exposures with high spatiotemporal resolution. Measurement and feedback of the results to healthcare workers and patients via a QR-code are completed within two hours. Based on a dose-responseµ model, it is used the plasmonic biosensing signal to calculate probabilities of SARS-CoV-2 infection risk and estimate maximum exposure durations to an acceptable risk threshold in different environmental settings.

Nosocomial COVID-19 Incidence and Secondary Attack Rates among Patients of Tertiary Care Center, Zurich, Switzerland.

Of 1,118 patients with COVID-19 at a university hospital in Switzerland during October 2020-June 2021, we found 83 (7.4%) had probable or definite healthcare-associated COVID-19. After in-hospital exposure, we estimated secondary attack rate at 23.3%. Transmission was associated with longer contact times and with lower cycle threshold values among index patients.

Identifying Contact Risks for SARS-CoV-2 Transmission to Healthcare Workers during Outbreak on COVID-19 Ward.

We assessed the risk for different exposures to SARS-CoV-2 during a COVID-19 outbreak among healthcare workers on a hospital ward in late 2020. We found working with isolated COVID-19 patients did not increase the risk of COVID-19 among workers, but working shifts with presymptomatic healthcare coworkers did.

Lower risk of peripheral venous catheter-related bloodstream infection by hand insertion.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about the bloodstream infection (BSI) risk associated with short-term peripheral venous catheters (PVCs) and no large study investigated the insertion site-related risk for PVC-BSI. METHODS: We performed a cohort study at the University of Geneva Hospitals using the prospective hospital-wide BSI surveillance database. We analyzed the association between insertion site and risk of PVC-BSI on the upper extremity using univariable and multivariable marginal Cox models. RESULTS: Between 2016 and 2020, utilization of 403'206 peripheral venous catheters were prospectively recorded in a 2000-bed hospital consortium with ten sites. Twenty-seven percent of PVC (n = 109'686) were inserted in the hand. After adjustment for confounding factors, hand insertion was associated with a decreased PVC-BSI risk (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.42, 95% CI 0.18-0.98, p = 0.046) compared to more proximal insertion sites. In a sensitivity analysis for PVCs with ≥ 3 days of dwell time, we confirmed a decreased PVC-BSI risk after hand insertion (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.15-0.93, p = 0.035). CONCLUSION: Hand insertion should be considered for reducing PVC infections, especially for catheters with an expected dwell time of more than 2 days.

Occupational and community risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among employees of a long-term care facility: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the contribution of both occupational and community exposure for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among employees of a university-affiliated long-term care facility (LTCF), during the 1st pandemic wave in Switzerland (March-June 2020). METHODS: We performed a nested analysis of a seroprevalence study among all volunteering LTCF staff to determine community and nosocomial risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity using modified Poison regression. We also combined epidemiological and genetic sequencing data from a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak investigation in a LTCF ward to infer transmission dynamics and acquisition routes of SARS-CoV-2, and evaluated strain relatedness using a maximum likelihood phylogenetic tree. RESULTS: Among 285 LTCF employees, 176 participated in the seroprevalence study, of whom 30 (17%) were seropositive for SARS-CoV-2. Most (141/176, 80%) were healthcare workers (HCWs). Risk factors for seropositivity included exposure to a COVID-19 inpatient (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 2.6; 95% CI 0.9-8.1) and community contact with a COVID-19 case (aPR 1.7; 95% CI 0.8-3.5). Among 18 employees included in the outbreak investigation, the outbreak reconstruction suggests 4 likely importation events by HCWs with secondary transmissions to other HCWs and patients. CONCLUSIONS: These two complementary epidemiologic and molecular approaches suggest a substantial contribution of both occupational and community exposures to COVID-19 risk among HCWs in LTCFs. These data may help to better assess the importance of occupational health hazards and related legal implications during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Impact of environmental hygiene interventions on healthcare-associated infections and patient colonization: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare-associated infections (HAI) are one of the gravest threats to patient safety worldwide. The importance of the hospital environment has recently been revalued in infection prevention and control. Though the literature is evolving rapidly, many institutions still do not consider healthcare environmental hygiene (HEH) very important for patient safety. The evidence for interventions in the healthcare environment on patient colonization and HAI with multidrug-resistant microorganisms (MDROs) or other epidemiologically relevant pathogens was reviewed. METHODS: We performed a systematic review according to the PRISMA guidelines using the PubMed and Web of Science databases. All original studies were eligible if published before December 31, 2019, and if the effect of an HEH intervention on HAI or patient colonization was measured. Studies were not eligible if they were conducted in vitro, did not include patient colonization or HAI as an outcome, were bundled with hand hygiene interventions, included a complete structural rebuild of the healthcare facility or were implemented during an outbreak. The primary outcome was the comparison of the intervention on patient colonization or HAI compared to baseline or control. Interventions were categorized by mechanical, chemical, human factors, or bundles. Study quality was assessed using a specifically-designed tool that considered study design, sample size, control, confounders, and issues with reporting. The effect of HEH interventions on environmental bioburden was studied as a secondary outcome. FINDINGS: After deduplication, 952 records were scrutinized, of which 44 were included for full text assessment. A total of 26 articles were included in the review and analyzed. Most studies demonstrated a reduction of patient colonization or HAI, and all that analyzed bioburden demonstrated a reduction following the HEH intervention. Studies tested mechanical interventions (n = 8), chemical interventions (n = 7), human factors interventions (n = 3), and bundled interventions (n = 8). The majority of studies (21/26, 81%) analyzed either S. aureus, C. difficile, and/or vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Most studies (23/26, 88%) reported a decrease of MDRO-colonization or HAI for at least one of the tested organisms, while 58% reported a significant decrease of MDRO-colonization or HAI for all tested microorganisms. Forty-two percent were of good quality according to the scoring system. The majority (21/26, 81%) of study interventions were recommended for application by the authors. Studies were often not powered adequately to measure statistically significant reductions. INTERPRETATION: Improving HEH helps keep patients safe. Most studies demonstrated that interventions in the hospital environment were related with lower HAI and/or patient colonization. Most of the studies were not of high quality; additional adequately-powered, high-quality studies are needed. Systematic registration number: CRD42020204909.

The Impact of Interventions to Prevent Neonatal Healthcare-associated Infections in Low- and Middle-income Countries: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Clinically suspected and laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infections are frequent causes of morbidity and mortality during neonatal care. The most effective infection prevention and control interventions for neonates in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) are unknown. AIM: To identify effective interventions in the prevention of hospital-acquired bloodstream infections in LMIC neonatal units. METHODS: Medline, PUBMED, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE and PsychInfo (January 2003 to October 2020) were searched to identify studies reporting single or bundled interventions for prevention of bloodstream infections in LMIC neonatal units. RESULTS: Our initial search identified 5206 articles; following application of filters, 27 publications met the inclusion and Integrated Quality Criteria for the Review of Multiple Study Designs assessment criteria and were summarized in the final analysis. No studies were carried out in low-income countries, only 1 in Sub-Saharan Africa and just 2 in multiple countries. Of the 18 single-intervention studies, most targeted skin (n = 4) and gastrointestinal mucosal integrity (n = 5). Whereas emollient therapy and lactoferrin achieved significant reductions in proven neonatal infection, glutamine and mixed probiotics showed no benefit. Chlorhexidine gluconate for cord care and kangaroo mother care reduced infection in individual single-center studies. Of the 9 studies evaluating bundles, most focused on prevention of device-associated infections and achieved significant reductions in catheter- and ventilator-associated infections. CONCLUSIONS: There is a limited evidence base for the effectiveness of infection prevention and control interventions in LMIC neonatal units; bundled interventions targeting device-associated infections were most effective. More multisite studies with robust study designs are needed to inform infection prevention and control intervention strategies in low-resource neonatal units.

What does antimicrobial stewardship look like where you are? Global narratives from participants in a massive open online course.

BACKGROUND: Whilst antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) is being implemented globally, contextual differences exist. We describe how the use of a massive open online course (MOOC) platform provided an opportunity to gather diverse narratives on AMS from around the world. METHODS: A free 3 week MOOC titled 'Tackling antimicrobial resistance: a social science approach' was launched in November 2019. Learners were asked specific questions about their experiences of AMS via 38 optional free-text prompts dispersed throughout the modules. Content analysis was used to identify key emerging themes from the learners' responses in the first three runs of the MOOC. RESULTS: Between November 2019 and July 2020, 1464 learners enrolled from 114 countries. Overall, 199 individual learners provided a total of 1097 responses to the prompts. The diverse perspectives describe unique challenges present in different contexts including ill-defined roles for pharmacists and nurses in AMS; inadequate governance and policy inconsistencies in surveillance for antibiotic consumption and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in some countries; lack of ownership of antibiotic decision-making and buy-in from different clinical specialties; and human resource and technological constraints. Patients' knowledge, experiences and perspectives were recognized as a valuable source of information that should be incorporated in AMS initiatives to overcome cultural barriers to the judicious use of antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of learner comments and reflections identified a range of enablers and barriers to AMS implementation across different healthcare economies. Common challenges to AMS implementation included the role of non-physician healthcare workers, resource limitations, gaps in knowledge of AMR, and patient engagement and involvement in AMS.

Estimating incidence and attributable length of stay of healthcare-associated infections-Modeling the Swiss point-prevalence survey.

OBJECTIVES: In 2017, a point-prevalence survey was conducted with 12,931 patients in 96 hospitals across Switzerland as part of the national strategy to prevent healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). We present novel statistical methods to assess incidence proportions of HAI and attributable length-of-stay (LOS) in point-prevalence surveys. METHODS: Follow-up data were collected for a subsample of patients and were used to impute follow-up data for all remaining patients. We used weights to correct length bias in logistic regression and multistate analyses. Methods were also tested in simulation studies. RESULTS: The estimated incidence proportion of HAIs during hospital stay and not present at admission was 2.3% (95% confidence intervals [CI], 2.1-2.6), the most common type being lower respiratory tract infections (0.8%; 95% CI, 0.6-1.0). Incidence proportion was highest in patients with a rapidly fatal McCabe score (7.8%; 95% CI, 5.7-10.4). The attributable LOS for all HAI was 6.4 days (95% CI, 5.6-7.3) and highest for surgical site infections (7.1 days, 95% CI, 5.2-9.0). It was longest in the age group of 18-44 years (9.0 days; 95% CI, 5.4-12.6). Risk-factor analysis revealed that McCabe score had no effect on the discharge hazard after infection (hazard ratio [HR], 1.21; 95% CI, 0.89-1.63). Instead, it only influenced the infection hazard (HR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.39-2.43) and the discharge hazard prior to infection (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.66-0.82). CONCLUSIONS: In point-prevalence surveys with limited follow-up data, imputation and weighting can be used to estimate incidence proportions and attributable LOS that would otherwise require complete follow-up data.

Decontaminating N95/FFP2 masks for reuse during the COVID-19 epidemic: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: With the current COVID-19 pandemic, many healthcare facilities have been lacking a steady supply of filtering facepiece respirators. To better address this challenge, the decontamination and reuse of these respirators is a strategy that has been studied by an increasing number of institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review in PubMed, PubMed Central, Embase, and Google Scholar. Studies were eligible when (electronically or in print) up to 17 June 2020, and published in English, French, German, or Spanish. The primary outcome was reduction of test viruses or test bacteria by log3 for disinfection and log6 for sterilization. Secondary outcome was physical integrity (fit/filtration/degradation) of the respirators after reprocessing. Materials from the grey literature, including an unpublished study were added to the findings. FINDINGS: Of 938 retrieved studies, 35 studies were included in the analysis with 70 individual tests conducted. 17 methods of decontamination were found, included the use of liquids (detergent, benzalkonium chloride, hypochlorite, or ethanol), gases (hydrogen peroxide, ozone, peracetic acid or ethylene oxide), heat (either moist with or without pressure or dry heat), or ultra violet radiation (UVA and UVGI); either alone or in combination. Ethylene oxide, gaseous hydrogen peroxide (with or without peracetic acid), peracetic acid dry fogging system, microwave-generated moist heat, and steam seem to be the most promising methods on decontamination efficacy, physical integrity and filtration capacity. INTERPRETATION: A number of methods can be used for N95/FFP2 mask reprocessing in case of shortage, helping to keep healthcare workers and patients safe. However, the selection of disinfection or sterilization methods must take into account local availability and turnover capacity as well as the manufacturer; meaning that some methods work better on specific models from specific manufacturers. SYSTEMATIC REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020193309.