A new form of irritant rhinitis to filtering facepiece particle (FFP) masks (FFP2/N95/KN95 respirators) during COVID-19 pandemic

Wearing face masks as a potential source for inhalation and oral uptake of inanimate toxins - A scoping review

BACKGROUND

From 2020 to 2023 many people around the world were forced to wear masks for large proportions of the day based on mandates and laws. We aimed to study the potential of face masks for the content and release of inanimate toxins.

METHODS

A scoping review of 1003 studies was performed (database search in PubMed/MEDLINE, qualitative and quantitative evaluation).

RESULTS

24 studies were included (experimental time 17 min to 15 days) evaluating content and/or release in 631 masks (273 surgical, 228 textile and 130 N95 masks). Most studies (63%) showed alarming results with high micro- and nanoplastics (MPs and NPs) release and exceedances could also be evidenced for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), xylene, acrolein, per-/polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), phthalates (including di(2-ethylhexyl)-phthalate, DEHP) and for Pb, Cd, Co, Cu, Sb and TiO2.

DISCUSSION

Of course, masks filter larger dirt and plastic particles and fibers from the air we breathe and have specific indications, but according to our data they also carry risks. Depending on the application, a risk-benefit analysis is necessary.

CONCLUSION

Undoubtedly, mask mandates during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic have been generating an additional source of potentially harmful exposition to toxins with health threatening and carcinogenic properties at population level with almost zero distance to the airways.

Systematic review of microplastics and nanoplastics in indoor and outdoor air: identifying a framework and data needs for quantifying human inhalation exposures

BACKGROUND

Humans are likely exposed to microplastics (MPs) in a variety of places including indoor and outdoor air. Research to better understand how exposure to MPs correlates to health is growing. To fully understand the possible impacts of MPs on human health, it is necessary to quantify MP exposure and identify what critical data gaps exist.

OBJECTIVES

The current paper provides a human exposure assessment of microplastics in the air using systematically reviewed literature that provided concentration of MPs in air as well as doses used in toxicology studies to calculate inhalation exposure dose.

METHODS

All published peer-reviewed journal articles, non-published papers, and grey literature that focused on micro- or nano-plastics in indoor and outdoor air were systematically searched using PRISMA guidelines. Literature that defined specific concentrations and size of MPs in air or exposed to human lung cells, animals, or humans with measurable health impacts were included in data extraction. Inhalational exposures were calculated for different age groups using published MP concentrations from the included literature using exposure dose equations and values from U.S. ATSDR and EPA.

RESULTS

Calculated mean indoor inhalational exposures from passive sampling methods were higher than those calculated from active sampling methods. When comparing indoor and outdoor sampling, calculated inhalation exposures from indoor samples were greater than those from outdoor samples. Inhalation exposures of MPs differed between age groups with infants having the highest calculated dose values for all locations followed by preschool age children, middle-school aged children, pregnant women, adolescents, and non-pregnant adults. MP doses used in toxicology studies produced higher calculated mean inhalational exposures than those from environmental samples.

IMPACT

This study is the first known systematic review of inhalational MP exposure from indoor and outdoor air. It also provides inhalational exposures calculated from previously published environmental samples of MPs as well as from toxicology studies.

Towards environmentally sustainable management: A review on the generation, degradation, and recycling of polypropylene face mask waste

There has been a considerable increase in the use of face masks in the past years. Managing face mask waste has become a global concern, as the current waste management system is insufficient to deal with such a large quantity of solid waste. The drastic increase in quantity, along with the material's inability to degrade plastic components such as polypropylene, has led to a large accumulation of plastic waste, causing a series of environmental and ecological challenges. In addition, the growing use also imposes pressure on waste management methods such as landfill and incineration, raising concerns about high energy consumption, low value-added utilization, and the release of additional pollutants during the process. This article initially reviews the impact of mask-related plastic waste generation and degradation behavior in the natural environment. It then provides an overview of various recently developed methods for recycling face mask plastic waste. The article also offers forward-looking strategies and recommendations on face mask plastic waste management. The review aims to provide guidance on harnessing the complexities of mask waste and other medical plastic pollution issues, as well as improving the current waste management system's deficiencies and inefficiencies in tackling the growing plastic waste problem.

Face mask as an indicator and shield of human exposure to traditional and novel organophosphate esters

Herein, the trapping effectiveness of N95, filter KN95, medical surgical masks (MSMs), and disposable medical masks (DMMs) against 19 airborne traditional and novel organophosphate esters (OPEs) was evaluated. Laboratory simulations (n = 24 for each type of mask) showed that time-dependent accumulation of ∑19OPEs on the four types of masks ranged between 30.1 and 86.6 ng in 24 h, with the highest and lowest median amounts trapped by the N95 masks (53.3 ng) and DMMs (43.2 ng), respectively. The trapping efficiency of the four types of masks for ∑19OPEs decreased over time from 84 % to 39 % in 24 h, with N95 masks showing the highest median efficiency (70 %). Further, field investigations were conducted in five types of microenvironments (train, hospital, bus, supermarket, and canteen), and an analysis of 200 samples showed that ∑19OPEs were accumulated in the masks with a variable amount from 3.7 to 117 ng/mask. Consistent with the laboratory simulations, the N95 masks (29.0 ng/mask) exhibited the highest hourly median amount of trapped OPEs, followed by the KN95 masks (24.5 ng/mask), MSMSs (17.4 ng/mask), and DMMs (15.8 ng/mask). Triethyl phosphate (TEP), tris(1-chloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TCIPP), tri-n-butyl phosphate (TNBP), and cresyl diphenyl phosphate (CDP) as well as 4-isopropylphenyl diphenyl phosphate (4IPPDPP) and 2,4-diisopropylphenyl diphenyl phosphate (24DIPPDPP) were the most commonly detected traditional and novel OPEs. Based on the amount of OPEs trapped on the masks, we estimated the concentration of ∑19OPEs in the train microenvironment to be the highest (222 ng/m3), which is approximately 2-5 times higher than that in the other microenvironments. The results of this study prove that masks can effectively protect humans from exposure to OPEs and act as low-cost indicators of indoor contamination.

Health effects of filtering facepiece respirators: Research and clinical implications of comfort, thermal, skin, psychologic, and workplace effects

Filtering facepiece respirators (FFR's) such as N95s have become widely used in appropriate settings for personal respiratory protection and are increasingly used beyond workplace settings. Concerns about possible adverse effects have appeared in many publications, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic led to much more widespread use. This paper synthesizes known effects based upon review of publications in PubMed since 1995, addressing effects other than pulmonary and cardiovascular (reviewed elsewhere). Findings: (1) Subjective discomfort is very frequently reported; this includes general discomfort or organ-system-specific complaints such as respiratory, headache, dermatologic, and heat. Research methods are widely divergent, and we propose a taxonomy to classify such studies by methodology, study population (subjects, experimental vs. observational methodology, comparator, specificity, and timeframe) to facilitate synthesis. (2) Objective measures of increased heat and humidity within the mask are well documented. (3) Frequency and characteristics of dermatologic effects have been insufficiently evaluated. (4) Physical mask designs are varied, making generalizations challenging. (5) More studies of impact on work performance and communication are needed. (6) Studies of effect of FFR design and accompanying training materials on ease and consistency of use are needed.

Physio-metabolic and clinical consequences of wearing face masks—Systematic review with meta-analysis and comprehensive evaluation

Background

As face masks became mandatory in most countries during the COVID-19 pandemic, adverse effects require substantiated investigation.

Methods

A systematic review of 2,168 studies on adverse medical mask effects yielded 54 publications for synthesis and 37 studies for meta-analysis (on n = 8,641, m = 2,482, f = 6,159, age = 34.8 ± 12.5). The median trial duration was only 18 min (IQR = 50) for our comprehensive evaluation of mask induced physio-metabolic and clinical outcomes.

Results

We found significant effects in both medical surgical and N95 masks, with a greater impact of the second. These effects included decreased SpO2 (overall Standard Mean Difference, SMD = −0.24, 95% CI = −0.38 to −0.11, p < 0.001) and minute ventilation (SMD = −0.72, 95% CI = −0.99 to −0.46, p < 0.001), simultaneous increased in blood-CO2 (SMD = +0.64, 95% CI = 0.31–0.96, p < 0.001), heart rate (N95: SMD = +0.22, 95% CI = 0.03–0.41, p = 0.02), systolic blood pressure (surgical: SMD = +0.21, 95% CI = 0.03–0.39, p = 0.02), skin temperature (overall SMD = +0.80 95% CI = 0.23–1.38, p = 0.006) and humidity (SMD +2.24, 95% CI = 1.32–3.17, p < 0.001). Effects on exertion (overall SMD = +0.9, surgical = +0.63, N95 = +1.19), discomfort (SMD = +1.16), dyspnoea (SMD = +1.46), heat (SMD = +0.70), and humidity (SMD = +0.9) were significant in n = 373 with a robust relationship to mask wearing (p < 0.006 to p < 0.001). Pooled symptom prevalence (n = 8,128) was significant for: headache (62%, p < 0.001), acne (38%, p < 0.001), skin irritation (36%, p < 0.001), dyspnoea (33%, p < 0.001), heat (26%, p < 0.001), itching (26%, p < 0.001), voice disorder (23%, p < 0.03), and dizziness (5%, p = 0.01).

Discussion

Masks interfered with O2-uptake and CO2-release and compromised respiratory compensation. Though evaluated wearing durations are shorter than daily/prolonged use, outcomes independently validate mask-induced exhaustion-syndrome (MIES) and down-stream physio-metabolic disfunctions. MIES can have long-term clinical consequences, especially for vulnerable groups. So far, several mask related symptoms may have been misinterpreted as long COVID-19 symptoms. In any case, the possible MIES contrasts with the WHO definition of health.

Conclusion

Face mask side-effects must be assessed (risk-benefit) against the available evidence of their effectiveness against viral transmissions. In the absence of strong empirical evidence of effectiveness, mask wearing should not be mandated let alone enforced by law.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021256694, identifier: PROSPERO 2021 CRD42021256694.

Patient safety implications of wearing a face mask for prevention in the era of COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and consensus recommendations

In the past, the use of face masks in western countries was essentially limited to occupational health. Now, because of the COVID-19 pandemic, mask-wearing has been recommended as a public health intervention. As potential side effects and some contraindications are emerging, we reviewed the literature to assess the impact of them in daily life on patient safety and to provide appropriate guidelines and recommendations. We performed a systematic review of studies investigating physiological impact, safety, and risk of masks in predefined categories of patients, which have been published in peer-reviewed journals with no time and language restrictions. Given the heterogeneity of studies, results were analyzed thematically. We used PRISMA guidelines to report our findings. Wearing a N95 respirator is more associated with worse side effects than wearing a surgical mask with the following complications: breathing difficulties (reduced FiO₂, SpO₂^, PaO₂ increased ETCO₂, PaCO₂), psychiatric symptoms (panic attacks, anxiety) and skin reactions. These complications are related to the duration of use and/or disease severity. Difficulties in communication is another issue to be considered especially with young children, older person and people with hearing impairments. Even if benefits of wearing face masks exceed the discomfort, it is recommended to take an "air break" after 1-2 h consecutively of mask-wearing. However, well-designed prospective studies are needed. The COVID-19 pandemic could represent a unique opportunity for collecting large amount of real-world data.

Does Prolonged FFP2 Mask Use Cause Changes in Nasal Cytology? A Pilot Observational Study on Healthcare Workers

TheCOVID-19 pandemic has rapidly spread worldwide. Individual prevention approaches include FFP2/N95 mask use. Healthcare (HC) workers wear face masks for a long time during their work shifts and often complain of nasal symptoms. Current data on mask-associated symptoms or upper airway epithelium transformations are limited. Nasal cytology (NC) is a useful, non-invasive diagnostic method to assess cellular alterations. The aim of this study is to compare NC in HC workers before and after the continuous wearing of FFP2 face masks. We conducted a pilot observational study on 10 volunteer HC workers, who continuously used FFP2 masks during the work shift. All subjects underwent NC at the beginning (T0) and at the end of their workshift (T1) and the cytological findings were compared. Moreover, nasal symptoms were collected. Rare inflammatory cells were detected at T0 and, comparing cytological data about T0 and T1, no significant differences were observed. The most reported nasal symptoms were itching (70%) and a dry nose (60%). Difficulty of breathing and nasal blockage were not relevant. These preliminary data seem to suggest that wearing an FFP2 mask does not determine observable alterations in NC in daily work. However, further studies on a larger population for a longer period are needed.

Blepharoconjunctivitis and Otolaryngological Disease Trends in the Context of Mask Wearing during the COVID-19 Pandemic

(1) Purpose: In 2020, wearing of face masks was mandated in the United States in an effort to lessen transmission of the novel 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic; however, long-term mask wearing may present with unintended side-effects in both ophthalmic and otolaryngologic clinical practice. This study aims to examine if mask wearing increased the incidence of primarily chalazion, blepharoconjunctivitis, and rhinitis occurrence during the mask-mandated COVID-19 pandemic period. (2) Methods: Medical records from tertiary academic center clinics were analyzed for incidence of ophthalmic and otolaryngologic diagnoses of interest (blepharoconjunctivitis- and rhinitis-related disorders). Data were collected from a pre-pandemic (March 2019–February 2020) and a mid-pandemic window (March 2020–February 2021) during which widespread mask mandates were implemented in Texas. Comparison was performed using a t-test analysis between incidence of chosen diagnoses during the described time periods. (3) Results: Incidence of ophthalmic disorders (primarily blepharoconjunctivitis and chalazion) in the pre-pandemic versus mid-pandemic windows did show a significant difference (p-value of 0.048). Similarly, comparison of otolaryngologic diagnoses (primarily rhinitis and related conditions) between the two time periods showed a significant difference (p-value of 0.044) as well. (4) Conclusion: Incidence of the chosen ophthalmic and otolaryngologic disorders did increase during periods of mask mandates. While these findings are preliminary, further studies are warranted to understand other factors that may have played a role in eye and nose pathology.

ENT symptoms of mask-wearing in the coronavirus disease 2019 era

OBJECTIVE

Analysis of the otorhinolaryngological problems caused by mask-wearing in the coronavirus disease 2019 era.

METHODS

A survey with 26 questions was sent by e-mail to 576 individuals.

RESULTS

The most frequently worn masks were three-layer surgical ear loop masks (n = 434, 80.1 per cent), followed by N95 or filtering facepiece code 2 masks (n = 58, 10.7 per cent), and cloth masks (n = 50, 9.2 per cent). The most bothersome symptoms caused by mask-wearing were difficulty in nasal breathing (n = 227, 41.8 per cent), nasal itching and pain (n = 93, 17.2 per cent), earache (n = 88, 16.2 per cent), difficulty in expressing oneself (n = 73, 13.5 per cent), difficulty in understanding speech (n = 56, 10.3 per cent), and ear itching (n = 5, 0.9 per cent).

CONCLUSION

The problems associated with mask-wearing may result in avoidance of wearing them. Thus, there is a need for new methods that will reduce the problems related to mask-wearing, to increase their use in the community.

Examination of the Effects of 4-Hour Nonvalved Filtering Facepiece Respirator Use on Blood Gas Values of Health Care Professionals: A Before and After Study

INTRODUCTION

The use of personal protective equipment increased rapidly during the COVID-19 pandemic that began in 2019. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of uninterrupted 4-hour use of internationally certified nonvalved filtering facepiece respirators on venous blood gas in health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A before-after design included venous blood gas analyses collected at the beginning of shifts before nonvalved filtering facepiece respirator had been put on and after 4-hour uninterrupted use of nonvalved filtering facepiece respirator.

RESULTS

In this study, 33 volunteer health care workers took part. In terms of blood gas values, mean pCO₂ values were 47.63 (SD = 5.16) before and 47.01 (SD = 5.07) after nonvalved filtering facepiece respirator use, mean HCO₃ values were 23.68 (SD = 1.10) in first blood gas analysis and 24.06 (SD = 1.31) in second blood gas analysis, and no significant difference was observed between before and after the use of nonvalved filtering facepiece respirator (t = 0.67, P = .50, t = -2.0, P = .054, respectively). The only significant difference in parameters investigated between the groups was in pH levels, at pH = 7.35 (SD = 0.29) before and pH = 7.36 (SD = 0.20) after nonvalved filtering facepiece respirator use (t = -2.26, P = .03).

CONCLUSION

Continuous nonvalved filtering facepiece respirator use for 4 hours was not associated with clinician impairment in blood gas and peripheral SpO₂ levels during nonexertional clinical ED work.

Medical masks' and respirators' pattern of use, adverse effects and errors among Portuguese health care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study

Background

During COVID-19 pandemic, a shortage of surgical masks (Mask) and respirators (Resp) was experienced worldwide. We aimed to assess its pattern of use, adverse effects and user errors by Portuguese health care professionals (HCP).

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted through snowball convenience sample, collected by email/ social media to health care organizations. Participants answered an online anonymous survey in March 2021.

Results

Mean age of 3052 respondents was 42.1 years old, 83.6% were female and 77.8% provided direct health care to COVID-19 patients. Mean time of use per shift was 6-8 hours in 40.8% of the participants. 28.0% reported never changing it during their shift. Resp use (vs Mask) was more associated with discomfort (58.2% vs 26.8%), affecting task performance (41.5 vs 18.9%) and communication (55.0 vs 40.9%), dyspnea (36.0 vs 14.4%), skin rash (37.5 vs 19.4%) and headache (37.5 vs 19.4%). Frequent user errors included touching the front while in use (70.1% Mask vs 66.3% Resp) and omitting hand hygiene before (61.8% Mask vs 55.0% Resp) or after use (61.3% Mask vs 57.0% Resp). Average number of errors was higher for Mask (4.3), than for Resp (3.2) (all: P < .001).

Conclusions

Most HCP admitted an extended use of Mask/ Resp. Resp were more prone to adverse effects and Mask more prone to errors. Strategies to reinforce good practices should be considered.

Recent Advances in Facemask Devices for In Vivo Sampling of Human Exhaled Breath Aerosols and Inhalable Environmental Exposures

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, the unprecedented use of facemasks has been requiring for wearing in daily life. By wearing facemask, human exhaled breath aerosols and inhaled environmental exposures can be efficiently filtered and thus various filtration residues can be deposited in facemask. Therefore, facemask could be a simple, wearable, in vivo, onsite and noninvasive sampler for collecting exhaled and inhalable compositions, and gain new insights into human health and environmental exposure. In this review, the recent advances in developments and applications of in vivo facemask sampling of human exhaled bacteria, viruses, proteins, and metabolites, and inhalable facemask contaminants and air pollutants, are reviewed. New features of facemask sampling are highlighted. The perspectives and challenges on further development and potential applications of facemask devices are also discussed.

Contact dermatitis due to personal protective equipment use and hygiene practices during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review of case reports

BACKGROUND

Prolonged use of personal protective equipment (PPE) may lead to contact dermatitis during the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic. This paper aims to identify the causative factors of contact dermatitis from PPE and hygiene practices.

METHODS

The search was conducted adhering to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. A Delphi process was employed to ensure that the aims of this study were met. PubMed and Web of Science databases were systematically searched through September 12, 2021, using search terms: Contact dermatitis, case report, covid-19. The findings were tabulated as author/year, gender, age, presentation, cause, dermatological diagnosis, testing modality, provided treatment, symptom resolution (time in days), prognosis, and follow-up.

RESULTS

The mean age of all individuals was 29.75 years, with 75% females. All cases presented with erythema, with 62.5% reporting pruritus and 37.5% reporting burning facial symptoms. Surgical masks and hand-hygiene products (37.5%) were the most commonly reported causative agent with 25% due to KN95/FFP type 2 use. Allergic contact dermatitis (50%) and irritant contact dermatitis (25%) were common diagnoses. Treatments included creams, emollients, and desloratadine, with restriction of irritant-causing factors. The prognosis was generally good among the cases, with 62.5% presenting complete resolution within a week and 12.5% showing moderate improvement at the fourth month after discontinuing use.

CONCLUSION

This study finds pertinent links between PPE use and contact dermatitis during the COVID-19 pandemic. While many cases are bound to go underreported in literature, well-designed, large-scale studies in the future may help promote these associations in a more comprehensive manner.

The impact of surgical masks on the nasal function in the COVID-19 era

BACKGROUND

The Covid-19 pandemics has obliged to using different types of personal protective devices (PPD) for a prolonged time of the day, especially in the Health Centers, with preference of surgical masks (SM) during the first pandemic waves.

AIMS/OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to assess the eventual changes of the nasal respiratory condition during continuous SM wearing.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Fourteen healthcare professionals filled a visual analogue scale (VAS) questionnaire for the detection of eventual nasal breathing impairment or symptoms. Nasal resistance and flow values were obtained via the active anterior rhinomanometry (AAR) that was performed under the basal condition, as well as immediately after wearing the surgical mask (SM) and 3 h after its continuous use.

RESULTS

The increase of inspiratory resistance was significantly correlated to the reduction of the maximum flux, when comparing SM parameters to the basal ones (r = -0.70, p < .05). At VAS evaluation, SM wearing showed to induce itching in 70% of the subjects, nasal dryness in 55%, nasal blockage in 50%, headache in 39%, watery nasal discharge in 20% and sneezing in 18%.

CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE

The SMs do not induce evident physiological variations of the nasal function due to a compensatory respiratory mechanism that, despite a progressive increase of nasal resistances, is not inducing significant changes of the nasal fluxes.

Filtering efficiency measurement of respirators by laser-based particle counting method

Respirators are one of the most useful personal protective equipment which can effectively limit the spreading of coronavirus (COVID-19). There are a worldwide shortage of respirators, melt-blown non-woven fabrics, and respirator testing possibilities. An easy and fast filtering efficiency measurement method was developed for testing the filtering materials of respirators. It works with a laser-based particle counting method, and it can determine two types of filtering efficiencies: Particle Filtering Efficiency (PFE) at given particle sizes and Concentration Filtering Efficiency (CFE) in the case of different aerosols. The measurement method was validated with different aerosol concentrations and with etalon respirators. Considerable advantages of our measurement method are simplicity, availability, and the relatively low price compared to the flame-photometer based methods. The ability of the measurement method was tested on ten different types of Chinese KN95 respirators. The quality of these respirators differs much, only two from ten reached 95% filtering efficiency.

The effect of N95 and surgical masks on mucociliary clearance function and sinonasal complaints

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to reveal the effect of N95 and surgical masks on mucociliary clearance function and sinonasal complaints.

METHODS

Sixty participants were enrolled in this study, including 30 people in N95 mask group and 30 people in surgical mask group. Two interviews, three days apart, were performed with all participants. The participants were asked not to use any mask before the first interview while they were asked to use the determined mask just before the second interview for 8 h. In both interviews, the mucociliary clearance times (MCTs) were measured and participants were asked to score ten distinct sinonasal complaints using visual analog scale (VAS). Data obtained from first interview were named pre-mask data, data obtained from second interview were called after-mask data. In both groups, pre-mask MCTs and VAS scores were compared with after-mask MCTs and VAS scores.

RESULTS

After-mask MCTs (mean = 13.03 ± 6.05 min) were significantly longer than pre-mask MCTs (mean = 10.19 ± 4.21 min) in N95 mask group (p = 0.002). No significant difference was found between after-mask and pre-mask MCTs (mean = 12.05 ± 5.21 min, mean = 11.00 ± 5.44 min, respectively) in surgical mask group (p = 0.234). When after-mask VAS scores were compared with pre-mask VAS scores, it was found that N95 mask use increased nasal blockage and postnasal discharge, surgical mask usage increased nasal blockage.

CONCLUSION

While the use of N95 mask leads to nasal blockage and postnasal discharge, surgical mask use results in nasal blockage. N95 masks cause impairment in mucociliary clearance function. But all these effects are mild. Surgical masks have not been found to have any effect on mucociliary clearance function.

Is a Mask That Covers the Mouth and Nose Free from Undesirable Side Effects in Everyday Use and Free of Potential Hazards?

Many countries introduced the requirement to wear masks in public spaces for containing SARS-CoV-2 making it commonplace in 2020. Up until now, there has been no comprehensive investigation as to the adverse health effects masks can cause. The aim was to find, test, evaluate and compile scientifically proven related side effects of wearing masks. For a quantitative evaluation, 44 mostly experimental studies were referenced, and for a substantive evaluation, 65 publications were found. The literature revealed relevant adverse effects of masks in numerous disciplines. In this paper, we refer to the psychological and physical deterioration as well as multiple symptoms described because of their consistent, recurrent and uniform presentation from different disciplines as a Mask-Induced Exhaustion Syndrome (MIES). We objectified evaluation evidenced changes in respiratory physiology of mask wearers with significant correlation of O2 drop and fatigue (p < 0.05), a clustered co-occurrence of respiratory impairment and O2 drop (67%), N95 mask and CO2 rise (82%), N95 mask and O2 drop (72%), N95 mask and headache (60%), respiratory impairment and temperature rise (88%), but also temperature rise and moisture (100%) under the masks. Extended mask-wearing by the general population could lead to relevant effects and consequences in many medical fields.

SARS-COV-2, can you be over it?

OBJECTIVES

Uncertainty has surrounded the duration of immunity against SARS CoV-2. This concerns both the duration of vaccine immunity and the duration of natural immunity. We aim to critically review the information available today, and draw practical conclusions.

METHODS

This is a narrative review of the recently published information on the topic, compared with the knowledge we already have of the behavior of various viral infectious agents.

RESULTS

It is too early to have any meaningful information on the duration of vaccine immunity against SARS CoV-2. For those who already had the infeciton, the rate of reinfection is very low. Most reinfections are due to laboratory errors, to incomplete cure of the primary infection, to the supervening immunodeficiency of the host, or to pre-existing immunodeficiency made evident by the SARS CoV-2 infection. The available studies on the immunology of the infection converge in indicating that it generates a robust and persistent immunity. This behavior does not differ from that of respiratory viruses known to date: in naturally occurring viral respiratory infections, reinfections are exceptional.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The civil community awaits suggestions from scientists not only to protect susceptible people, but to be able to safely resume activities made uncertain by the pandemic. From the information we have to-date, we suggest that, in principle, patients who have already overcome the infection should not be prioritized to the SARS CoV-2 vaccine. Instead, they could be provided with an immunological passport that allows them to resume a normal social life.

[Use of masks by children to prevent infection with SARS-CoV-2]

Das Tragen von Masken (Alltagsmaske oder chirurgische Maske) ist neben der Abstandswahrung und Hygienemaßnahmen zu einem wesentlichen Mittel zur Eindämmung der SARS-CoV-2-Pandemie geworden. Sie stellen eine wesentliche Barriere für infektiöse Tröpfchen im Nahfeld dar und können neben dem Fremdschutz möglicherweise auch den Träger schützen. Nach Darstellung möglicher körperlicher oder seelischer Nebenwirkungen bei Erwachsenen werden die wenigen Daten zu unerwünschten Wirkungen bei Kindern referiert. Bei bestimmungsgemäßer Anwendung sind bislang keine wesentlichen Nebenwirkungen bekannt geworden. Allerdings können Masken sehr lästig sein. Die Schlussfolgerung besagt, dass bei gesunden wachen Kindern, die jederzeit in der Lage sind, die Maske selbstständig abzunehmen, unerwünschte Wirkungen nicht zu befürchten sind. Während Kinder etwa ab 10 Jahren mit einer Maske nach altersgemäßer Aufklärung und Demonstration sinnvoll und effektiv umgehen können, sodass das Tragen auch vorgeschrieben werden kann, sollten Grundschüler nicht dazu verpflichtet und Vorschulkinder davon befreit werden. Die Tragedauer sollte begrenzt werden, und Schulkinder, die an ihrem Platz unter Einhaltung des Abstandsgebotes sitzen, sollen die Maske abnehmen dürfen.