Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 434
Filtrar
1.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 5887, 2021 03 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33723303

RESUMEN

Based on the current knowledge of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission, wearing a mask has been recommended during the COVID-19 pandemic. Bacterial filtration efficiency (BFE) measurements enable designing and regulating medical masks to prevent bioaerosol dissemination; however, despite the simplicity of these measurements, several scientific questions remain unanswered regarding BFE tests. Here, we investigated (1) the impact of substituting 100-mm Petri dishes with 90-mm disposable Petri dishes, (2) the impact of colony-counting methods on the bioaerosol aerodynamic size, and (3) the impact of colony-counting methods on the total viable particle counts. We demonstrated that disposable 90-mm Petri dishes can be used to replace the 100-mm dishes. We also showed that an automatic high-resolution colony counter can be used to directly count viable particles on collection substrates and to measure the bioaerosol size parameters. Our results enable possible modernization of the outdated testing methods recommended in the US and European standards for BFE measurements. Specifically, use of a modernized colony counter should be clearly regulated and permitted to avoid the counting of positive holes. The median aerodynamic diameter appears to be the most relevant parameter for characterizing bioaerosol size.


Asunto(s)
Bacterias , Filtración/normas , Máscaras/normas , Carga Bacteriana , Microbiología Ambiental , Filtración/métodos , Humanos , Máscaras/microbiología , Tamaño de la Partícula , Porosidad
3.
Sensors (Basel) ; 21(5)2021 Feb 24.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33668141

RESUMEN

Size- and time-dependent particle removal efficiency (PRE) of different protective respiratory masks were determined using a standard aerosol powder with the size of particles in the range of an uncoated SARS-CoV-2 virus and small respiratory droplets. Number concentration of particles was measured by a scanning mobility particle sizer. Respiratory protective half-masks, surgical masks, and cotton washable masks were tested. The results show high filtration efficiency of FFP2, FFP3, and certified surgical masks for all sizes of tested particles, while protection efficiency of washable masks depends on their constituent fabrics. Measurements showed decreasing PRE of all masks over time due to transmission of nanoparticles through the mask-face interface. On the other hand, the PRE of the fabric is governed by deposition of the aerosols, consequently increasing the PRE.


Asunto(s)
/prevención & control , Filtración , Máscaras/normas , Aerosoles , Humanos , Pandemias , Tamaño de la Partícula , Equipo de Protección Personal/normas
4.
J Infect Dev Ctries ; 15(1): 51-57, 2021 Jan 31.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33571145

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a global pandemic. The virus spreads through respiratory droplets and close contact. Therefore, the availability of personal protective equipment (PPE) for healthcare professionals is essential. 3D printing technology could represent a valid option to ameliorate PPE shortages. METHODOLOGY: Custom-made face mask were designed on the basis of facial scan and then 3D-printed. The whole protocol is executed with freeware software and only required a 3D printer. Six healthcare workers wore the device weekly thus expressing a judgment regarding quality of work, respiratory and skin comfort. RESULTS: The estimated total cost of a single mask is approximately 5 USD. The virtual design of a complete mask lasted 68 minutes on average. Most healthcare workers rated comfort as very good. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the encouraging results obtained, we can confidently confirm that custom-made masks are novel and useful devices that may be used in the fight against COVID-19.


Asunto(s)
/prevención & control , Diseño de Equipo/métodos , Máscaras/normas , Impresión Tridimensional , Diseño de Equipo/instrumentación , Femenino , Personal de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Máscaras/economía , Impresión Tridimensional/economía
5.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33567665

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, there was shortage of the standard respiratory protective equipment (RPE). The aim of this study was to develop a procedure to test the performance of alternative RPEs used in the care of COVID-19 patients. METHODS: A laboratory-based test was developed to compare RPEs by total inward leakage (TIL). We used a crossflow nebulizer to produce a jet spray of 1-100 µm water droplets with a fluorescent marker. The RPEs were placed on a dummy head and sprayed at distances of 30 and 60 cm. The outcome was determined as the recovery of the fluorescent marker on a membrane filter placed on the mouth of the dummy head. RESULTS: At 30 cm, a type IIR surgical mask gave a 17.7% lower TIL compared with an FFP2 respirator. At 60 cm, this difference was similar, with a 21.7% lower TIL for the surgical mask compared to the respirator. When adding a face shield, the TIL at 30 cm was further reduced by 9.5% for the respirator and 16.6% in the case of the surgical mask. CONCLUSIONS: A safe, fast and very sensitive test method was developed to assess the effectiveness of RPE by comparison under controlled conditions.


Asunto(s)
/prevención & control , Transmisión de Enfermedad Infecciosa de Paciente a Profesional/prevención & control , Máscaras/normas , Equipo de Protección Personal/normas , Dispositivos de Protección Respiratoria/normas , Aerosoles/efectos adversos , Humanos , Exposición Profesional/prevención & control , Ventiladores Mecánicos , Agua
6.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(7): 254-257, 2021 Feb 19.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33600386

RESUMEN

Universal masking is one of the prevention strategies recommended by CDC to slow the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1). As of February 1, 2021, 38 states and the District of Columbia had universal masking mandates. Mask wearing has also been mandated by executive order for federal property* as well as on domestic and international transportation conveyances.† Masks substantially reduce exhaled respiratory droplets and aerosols from infected wearers and reduce exposure of uninfected wearers to these particles. Cloth masks§ and medical procedure masks¶ fit more loosely than do respirators (e.g., N95 facepieces). The effectiveness of cloth and medical procedure masks can be improved by ensuring that they are well fitted to the contours of the face to prevent leakage of air around the masks' edges. During January 2021, CDC conducted experimental simulations using pliable elastomeric source and receiver headforms to assess the extent to which two modifications to medical procedure masks, 1) wearing a cloth mask over a medical procedure mask (double masking) and 2) knotting the ear loops of a medical procedure mask where they attach to the mask's edges and then tucking in and flattening the extra material close to the face (knotted and tucked masks), could improve the fit of these masks and reduce the receiver's exposure to an aerosol of simulated respiratory droplet particles of the size considered most important for transmitting SARS-CoV-2. The receiver's exposure was maximally reduced (>95%) when the source and receiver were fitted with modified medical procedure masks. These laboratory-based experiments highlight the importance of good fit to optimize mask performance. Until vaccine-induced population immunity is achieved, universal masking is a highly effective means to slow the spread of SARS-CoV-2** when combined with other protective measures, such as physical distancing, avoiding crowds and poorly ventilated indoor spaces, and good hand hygiene. Innovative efforts to improve the fit of cloth and medical procedure masks to enhance their performance merit attention.


Asunto(s)
/prevención & control , Máscaras/normas , /epidemiología , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Humanos , Máscaras/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
7.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33557403

RESUMEN

The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic brought about a broader use of masks by both professionals and the general population. This resulted in a severe worldwide shortage of devices and the need to increase import and activate production of safe and effective surgical masks at the national level. In order to support the demand for testing surgical masks in the Italian context, Universities provided their contribution by setting up laboratories for testing mask performance before releasing products into the national market. This paper reports the effort of seven Italian university laboratories who set up facilities for testing face masks during the emergency period of the COVID-19 pandemic. Measurement set-ups were built, adapting the methods specified in the EN 14683:2019+AC. Data on differential pressure (DP) and bacterial filtration efficiency (BFE) of 120 masks, including different materials and designs, were collected over three months. More than 60% of the masks satisfied requirements for DP and BFE set by the standard. Masks made of nonwoven polypropylene with at least three layers (spunbonded-meltblown-spunbonded) showed the best results, ensuring both good breathability and high filtration efficiency. The majority of the masks created with alternative materials and designs did not comply with both standard requirements, resulting in suitability only as community masks. The effective partnering between universities and industries to meet a public need in an emergency context represented a fruitful example of the so-called university "third-mission".


Asunto(s)
/prevención & control , Laboratorios , Máscaras/normas , Pandemias , Humanos , Italia
8.
J Prev Med Public Health ; 54(1): 31-36, 2021 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33618497

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Non-traditional materials are used for mask construction to address personal protective equipment shortages during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Reusable masks made from surgical sterilization wrap represent such an innovative approach with social media frequently referring to them as "N95 alternatives." This material was tested for particle filtration efficiency and breathability to clarify what role they might have in infection prevention and control. METHODS: A heavyweight, double layer sterilization wrap was tested when new and after 2, 4, 6, and 10 autoclave sterilizing cycles and compared with an approved N95 respirator and a surgical mask via testing procedures using a sodium chloride aerosol for N95 efficiency testing similar to 42 CFR 84.181. Pressure testing to indicate breathability was also conducted. RESULTS: The particle filtration efficiency for the sterilization wrap ranged between 58% to 66%, with similar performance when new and after sterilizing cycles. The N95 respirator and surgical mask performed at 95% and 68% respectively. Pressure drops for the sterilization wrap, N95 and surgical mask were 10.4 mmH2O, 5.9 mmH2O, and 5.1 mmH2O, respectively, well below the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health limits of 35 mmH2O during initial inhalation and 25 mmH2O during initial exhalation. CONCLUSIONS: The sterilization wrap's particle filtration efficiency is much lower than a N95 respirator, but falls within the range of a surgical mask, with acceptable breathability. Performance testing of non-traditional mask materials is crucial to determine potential protection efficacy and for correcting misinterpretation propagated through popular media.


Asunto(s)
Filtración/normas , Máscaras/normas , Filtración/instrumentación , Filtración/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Máscaras/microbiología , Máscaras/virología , Exposición Profesional/prevención & control , Pandemias/prevención & control , Equipo de Protección Personal/normas , Equipo de Protección Personal/estadística & datos numéricos , Esterilización/métodos , Esterilización/normas , Esterilización/estadística & datos numéricos
9.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(6): 208-211, 2021 Feb 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33571175

RESUMEN

Approximately 41% of adults aged 18-24 years in the United States are enrolled in a college or university (1). Wearing a face mask can reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (2), and many colleges and universities mandate mask use in public locations and outdoors when within six feet of others. Studies based on self-report have described mask use ranging from 69.1% to 86.1% among adults aged 18-29 years (3); however, more objective measures are needed. Direct observation by trained observers is the accepted standard for monitoring behaviors such as hand hygiene (4). In this investigation, direct observation was used to estimate the proportion of persons wearing masks and the proportion of persons wearing masks correctly (i.e., covering the nose and mouth and secured under the chin*) on campus and at nearby off-campus locations at six rural and suburban universities with mask mandates in the southern and western United States. Trained student observers recorded mask use for up to 8 weeks from fixed sites on campus and nearby. Among 17,200 observed persons, 85.5% wore masks, with 89.7% of those persons wearing the mask correctly (overall correct mask use: 76.7%). Among persons observed indoors, 91.7% wore masks correctly. The proportion correctly wearing masks indoors varied by mask type, from 96.8% for N95-type masks and 92.2% for cloth masks to 78.9% for bandanas, scarves, and similar face coverings. Observed indoor mask use was high at these six universities with mask mandates. Colleges and universities can use direct observation findings to tailor training and messaging toward increasing correct mask use.


Asunto(s)
Máscaras/estadística & datos numéricos , Máscaras/normas , Salud Pública/legislación & jurisprudencia , Estudiantes/psicología , Universidades/legislación & jurisprudencia , Adolescente , /prevención & control , Humanos , Estudiantes/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto Joven
10.
J Trauma Acute Care Surg ; 90(4): e72-e80, 2021 04 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33433175

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Health care facilities in low- and middle-income countries are inadequately resourced to adhere to current COVID-19 prevention recommendations. Recommendations for surgical emergency trauma care measures need to be adequately informed by available evidence and adapt to particular settings. To inform future recommendations, we set to summarize the effects of different personal protective equipment (PPE) on the risk of COVID-19 infection in health personnel caring for trauma surgery patients. METHODS: We conducted an umbrella review using Living Overview of Evidence platform for COVID-19, which performs regular automated searches in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and more than 30 other sources. Systematic reviews of experimental and observational studies assessing the efficacy of PPE were included. Indirect evidence from other health care settings was also considered. Risk of bias was assessed with the AMSTAR II tool (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews, Ottawa, ON, Canada), and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach for grading the certainty of the evidence is reported (registered in International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, CRD42020198267). RESULTS: Eighteen studies that fulfilled the selection criteria were included. There is high certainty that the use of N95 respirators and surgical masks is associated with a reduced risk of COVID-19 when compared with no mask use. In moderate- to high-risk environments, N95 respirators are associated with a further reduction in risk of COVID-19 infection compared with surgical masks. Eye protection also reduces the risk of contagion in this setting. Decontamination of masks and respirators with ultraviolet germicidal irradiation, vaporous hydrogen peroxide, or dry heat is effective and does not affect PPE performance or fit. CONCLUSION: The use of PPE drastically reduces the risk of COVID-19 compared with no mask use in health care workers. N95 and equivalent respirators provide more protection than surgical masks. Decontamination and reuse appear feasible to overcome PPE shortages and enhance the allocation of limited resources. These effects are applicable to emergency trauma care and should inform future recommendations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Review, level II.


Asunto(s)
/prevención & control , Personal de Salud , Control de Infecciones , Máscaras , Servicio de Cirugía en Hospital , Centros Traumatológicos , /epidemiología , Descontaminación/métodos , Equipo Reutilizado , Humanos , Control de Infecciones/instrumentación , Control de Infecciones/métodos , Máscaras/normas , Máscaras/virología , /virología , Equipo de Protección Personal/clasificación , Equipo de Protección Personal/normas
11.
Enferm Clin ; 31 Suppl 1: S73-S77, 2021 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés, Español | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33487530

RESUMEN

The main element of personal protective equipment against the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic are masks, which protect against droplets and aerosols that can remain suspended in the air. The objective of this study is to summarize the existing evidence on the filtration of different materials for the manufacture of masks. A scoping review or exploratory review has been carried out in the PubMEd and Scopus databases, using the terms "respirator", "mask", "facemask", "material", and "tissue", combined with Boolean operators. The results show some of the materials used for the manufacture of masks, both surgical masks and medium-high filtration masks, as well as materials used for the manufacture of household masks. As a conclusion, it is necessary to know the characteristics of the different materials as well as their properties to guarantee an adequate use according to the specific needs in each context, being fundamental the application of particle filtration systems as well as support materials that comply with current recommendations.


Asunto(s)
/prevención & control , Máscaras/normas , /epidemiología , Celulosa/normas , Diseño de Equipo/métodos , Filtración/instrumentación , Filtración/normas , Personal de Salud , Humanos , Máscaras/provisión & distribución , Pandemias , Equipo de Protección Personal/provisión & distribución , Polipropilenos/normas , Electricidad Estática , Textiles/normas
12.
Anaesthesia ; 76(5): 617-622, 2021 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33470422

RESUMEN

Disposable N95 respirator masks are the current standard for healthcare worker respiratory protection in the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to shortages, qualitative fit testing can have low sensitivity for detecting poor fit, leading to inconsistent protection. Multiple groups have developed alternative solutions such as modified snorkel masks to overcome these limitations, but validation of these solutions has been lacking. We sought to determine if N95s and snorkel masks with attached high-efficiency filters provide consistent protection levels in healthcare workers and if the addition of positive pressure via an inexpensive powered-air purifying respirator to the snorkel mask would provide enhanced protection. Fifty-one healthcare workers who were qualitatively fitted with N95 masks underwent quantitative mask fit testing according to a simulated workplace exercise protocol. N95, snorkel masks with high-efficiency filters and snorkel masks with powered-air purifying respirators were tested. Respiratory filtration ratios were collected for each step and averaged to obtain an overall workplace protocol fit factor. Failure was defined as either an individual filtration ratio or an overall fit factor below 100. N95s and snorkel masks with high-efficiency filters failed one or more testing steps in 59% and 20% of participants, respectively, and 24% and 12% failed overall fit factors, respectively. The snorkel masks with powered-air purifying respirators had zero individual or overall failures. N95 and snorkel masks with high-efficiency filter respirators were found to provide inconsistent respiratory protection in healthcare workers.


Asunto(s)
/prevención & control , Análisis Costo-Beneficio/normas , Personal de Salud/normas , Máscaras/normas , /normas , Adulto , Estudios de Cohortes , Diseño de Equipo/economía , Diseño de Equipo/normas , Femenino , Personal de Salud/economía , Humanos , Masculino , Máscaras/economía , Persona de Mediana Edad , Exposición Profesional/economía , Exposición Profesional/prevención & control , Equipo de Protección Personal/economía , Equipo de Protección Personal/normas , Estudios Prospectivos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados
15.
Ann Fam Med ; 19(1): 55-62, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33431393

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led at times to a scarcity of personal protective equipment, including medical masks, for health care clinicians, especially in primary care settings. The objective of this review was to summarize current evidence regarding the use of cloth masks to prevent respiratory viral infections, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), among health care clinicians. METHODS: We searched 5 databases, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website, and the reference lists of identified articles on April 3, 2020. All identified publications were independently screened by 2 reviewers. Two authors independently extracted data and graded the studies. Randomized control trials (RCTs) were graded using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist, and observational and nonhuman subject studies were graded using 11 domains common across frequently used critical appraisal tools. All discrepancies were resolved by consensus. RESULTS: Our search identified 136 original publications. Nine studies met inclusion criteria. We performed a qualitative synthesis of the data from these studies. Four nonrandomized trials, 3 laboratory studies, 1 single-case experiment, and 1 RCT were identified. The laboratory studies found that cloth materials provided measurable levels of particle filtration but were less efficacious at blocking biologic material than medical masks. The RCT found that cloth masks were associated with significantly more viral infections than medical masks. CONCLUSIONS: The current literature suggests that cloth materials are somewhat efficacious in filtering particulate matter and aerosols but provide a worse fit and inferior protection compared to medical masks in clinical environments. The quality and quantity of literature addressing this question are lacking. Cloth masks lack evidence for adequate protection of health care clinicians against respiratory viral infections.


Asunto(s)
/prevención & control , Transmisión de Enfermedad Infecciosa de Paciente a Profesional/prevención & control , Máscaras/normas , Textiles , Diseño de Equipo , Humanos , Máscaras/provisión & distribución , Ensayo de Materiales , Equipo de Protección Personal/provisión & distribución , Estados Unidos
16.
Epidemiol Infect ; 149: e24, 2021 01 14.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33441205

RESUMEN

The severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is highly contagious, and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by it has forced many countries to adopt 'lockdown' measures to prevent the spread of the epidemic through social isolation of citizens. Some countries proposed universal mask wearing as a protection measure of public health to strengthen national prevention efforts and to limit the wider spread of the epidemic. In order to reveal the epidemic prevention efficacy of masks, this paper systematically evaluates the experimental studies of various masks and filter materials, summarises the general characteristics of the filtration efficiency of isolation masks with particle size, and reveals the actual efficacy of masks by combining the volume distribution characteristics of human exhaled droplets with different particle sizes and the SARS-CoV-2 virus load of nasopharynx and throat swabs from patients. The existing measured data show that the filtration efficiency of all kinds of masks for large particles and extra-large droplets is close to 100%. From the perspective of filtering the total number of pathogens discharged in the environment and protecting vulnerable individuals from breathing live viruses, the mask has a higher protective effect. If considering the weighted average filtration efficiency with different particle sizes, the filtration efficiencies of the N95 mask and the ordinary mask are 99.4% and 98.5%, respectively. The mask can avoid releasing active viruses to the environment from the source of infection, thus maximising the protection of vulnerable individuals by reducing the probability of inhaling a virus. Therefore, if the whole society strictly implements the policy of publicly wearing masks, the risk of large-scale spread of the epidemic can be greatly reduced. Compared with the overall cost of social isolation, limited personal freedoms and forced suspension of economic activities, the inconvenience for citizens caused by wearing masks is perfectly acceptable.


Asunto(s)
/epidemiología , Máscaras/normas , Aerosoles , Humanos , Nasofaringe/virología , Orofaringe/virología , Tamaño de la Partícula , Carga Viral
17.
PLoS One ; 16(1): e0245688, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33481870

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has made well-fitting face masks a critical piece of protective equipment for healthcare workers and civilians. While the importance of wearing face masks has been acknowledged, there remains a lack of understanding about the role of good fit in rendering protective equipment useful. In addition, supply chain constraints have caused some organizations to abandon traditional quantitative or/and qualitative fit testing, and instead, have implemented subjective fit checking. Our study seeks to quantitatively evaluate the level of fit offered by various types of masks, and most importantly, assess the accuracy of implementing fit checks by comparing fit check results to quantitative fit testing results. METHODS: Seven participants first evaluated N95 and KN95 respirators by performing a fit check. Participants then underwent quantitative fit testing wearing five N95 respirators, a KN95 respirator, a surgical mask, and fabric masks. RESULTS: N95 respirators offered higher degrees of protection than the other categories of masks tested; however, it should be noted that most N95 respirators failed to fit the participants adequately. Fit check responses had poor correlation with quantitative fit factor scores. KN95, surgical, and fabric masks achieved low fit factor scores, with little protective difference recorded between respiratory protection options. In addition, small facial differences were observed to have a significant impact on quantitative fit. CONCLUSION: Fit is critical to the level of protection offered by respirators. For an N95 respirator to provide the promised protection, it must fit the participant. Performing a fit check via NHS self-assessment guidelines was an unreliable way of determining fit.


Asunto(s)
/prevención & control , Máscaras , Textiles , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Máscaras/normas , Máscaras/virología , Persona de Mediana Edad , /virología , Exposición Profesional/prevención & control , Textiles/virología , Adulto Joven
18.
Future Microbiol ; 16: 5-11, 2021 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33350330

RESUMEN

Aim: Face masks are an important addition to our arsenal in the fight against COVID-19. The aim of this study is to present a novel method of measuring mask performance which can simultaneously assess both fabric penetration and leakage due to poor fit. Materials & methods: A synthetic aerosol is introduced into the lung of a medical dummy. A conical laser sheet surrounds the face of the dummy where it illuminates the aerosol emitted during a simulated breath. The system is demonstrated with five mask types. Conclusions: The curved laser sheet highlights both penetration through the mask fabric and leakage around the edges of the mask. A large variation in both material penetration and leakage was observed.


Asunto(s)
/prevención & control , Máscaras/normas , Textiles , Aerosoles/análisis , Vestuario , Diseño de Equipo , Humanos , Ensayo de Materiales , Tamaño de la Partícula , Equipo de Protección Personal/normas , Cloruro de Sodio
19.
Health Commun ; 36(1): 6-14, 2021 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33225745

RESUMEN

Wide-spread misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic has presented challenges for communicating public health recommendations. Should campaigns to promote protective behaviors focus on debunking misinformation or targeting behavior-specific beliefs? To address this question, we examine whether belief in COVID-19 misinformation is directly associated with two behaviors (face mask wearing and social distancing), and whether behavior-specific beliefs can account for this association and better predict behavior, consistent with behavior-change theory. We conducted a nationally representative two-wave survey of U.S. adults from 5/26/20-6/12/20 (n = 1074) and 7/15/20-7/21//20 (n = 889; follow-up response 83%). Scales were developed and validated for COVID-19 related misinformation beliefs, social distancing and face mask wearing, and beliefs about the consequences of both behaviors. Cross-lagged panel linear regression models assessed relationships among the variables. While belief in misinformation was negatively associated with both face mask wearing (B = -.27, SE =.06) and social-distancing behaviors (B = -.46, SE =.08) measured at the same time, misinformation did not predict concurrent or lagged behavior when the behavior-specific beliefs were incorporated in the models. Beliefs about behavioral outcomes accounted for face mask wearing and social distancing, both cross-sectionally (B =.43, SE =.05; B =.63, SE =.09) and lagged over time (B =.20, SE = 04; B =.30, SE =.08). In conclusion, belief in COVID-19-related misinformation is less relevant to protective behaviors, but beliefs about the consequences of these behaviors are important predictors. With regard to misinformation, we recommend health campaigns aimed at promoting protective behaviors emphasize the benefits of these behaviors, rather than debunking unrelated false claims.


Asunto(s)
/prevención & control , Comunicación en Salud/normas , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Máscaras/normas , Adulto , /psicología , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles/métodos , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles/normas , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Conductas Relacionadas con la Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pandemias , Salud Pública , Conducta de Reducción del Riesgo , Factores Socioeconómicos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...