Universal Masking in Health Care Settings: A Pandemic Strategy Whose Time Has Come and Gone, For Now

National partnerships address critical needs in infection prevention and control

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted gaps in infection control knowledge and practice across health settings nationwide. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, with funding through the American Rescue Plan, developed Project Firstline. Project Firstline is a national collaborative aiming to reach all aspects of the health care frontline. The American Medical Association recruited eight physicians and one medical student to join their director of infectious diseases to develop educational programs targeting knowledge gaps. They have identified 5 critical areas requiring national attention.

A questionnaire survey of infection control measures during the coronavirus infectious disease 2019 pandemic era

OBJECTIVE

To clarify the infection control measures required in the event of a new infectious disease outbreak, we conducted a questionnaire survey on the infection control measures implemented against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

An invitation to participate in this survey was sent to the heads of 2689 facilities affiliated with the members of the Japanese Society for Infection Prevention and Control in February 2023, requesting responses to the online survey using Google Forms by March 2023.

RESULTS

Six hundred and forty-five facilities, including 20 clinics and 625 hospitals, participated in the survey. This survey revealed that various infection control measures were implemented, including universal masking in the non-COVID-19 ward (96.5 %), screening tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on scheduled admission (89.0 %), SARS-CoV-2 tests (98.7 %), and isolation in private rooms (76.5 %) for inpatients with fever. However, nosocomial infections and clusters of COVID-19 occurred in 94.4 % and 90.9 % of cases during the investigation period, respectively. One of the reasons for these results is that healthcare personnel (HCP) and patients were common index cases of nosocomial infections, and the most common cause of clusters was the work of symptomatic HCPs. These results suggest that HCPs should understand that they can be index cases or spreaders. On the other hand, the most common support from external facilities was healthcare centers, followed by physicians or nurses from other hospitals.

CONCLUSION

In response to the emergence of infections, it is important to consider implementing infection control measures for HCPs and patients.

A survey of healthcare workers on the acceptance and value of personal protective equipment for patient care

OBJECTIVE

Assess healthcare workers' (HCW) attitudes toward universal masking, and gowns and gloves used as part of transmission-based precautions.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Academic, tertiary care medical center in Baltimore, Maryland.

PARTICIPANTS

HCW who work in patient care areas and have contact with patients.

METHODS

In May 2023, a 15-question web-based survey was distributed by the hospital's communications team via email. The survey contained questions to assess HCW perceptions of universal masking policies prior to the availability of COVID-19 vaccines and at the time of the survey, and the use of gowns and gloves for transmission-based precautions. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize data. Differences in agreement with universal masking over time, level of agreement with gown and glove policies, and with all PPE types across respondent characteristics were assessed.

RESULTS

257 eligible respondents completed the survey. Nurses and patient care technicians (43%) and providers (17%) were the most commonly reported roles. Agreement with universal mask use decreased from 84% early in the pandemic to 55% at the time of the survey. 70% and 72% of HCW agreed masks protect themselves and others, respectively. 63% expressed any level of annoyance with mask wearing, the most often due to communication challenges or physical discomfort. 75% agreed with gown use for antibiotic-resistant bacteria compared with 90% for glove use.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of HCW agree with the use of PPE to prevent pathogen transmission in the healthcare setting. Agreement with universal mask use for patient care shifted during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Morbidity and Mortality of Hospital-Onset SARS-CoV-2 Infections Due to Omicron Versus Prior Variants : A Propensity-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Many hospitals have scaled back measures to prevent nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infection given large decreases in the morbidity and mortality of SARS-CoV-2 infections for most people. Little is known, however, about the morbidity and mortality of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infections for hospitalized patients in the Omicron era.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the effect of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infection on hospitalized patients' outcomes during the pre-Omicron and Omicron periods.

DESIGN

Retrospective matched cohort study.

SETTING

5 acute care hospitals in Massachusetts, December 2020 to April 2023.

PATIENTS

Adults testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 on or after hospital day 5, after negative SARS-CoV-2 test results on admission and on hospital day 3, were matched to control participants by hospital, service, time period, days since admission, and propensity scores that incorporated demographics, comorbid conditions, vaccination status, primary diagnosis category, vital signs, and laboratory test values.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcomes were hospital mortality and time to discharge. Secondary outcomes were intensive care unit (ICU) admission, need for advanced oxygen support, discharge destination, hospital-free days, and 30-day readmissions.

RESULTS

There were 274 cases of hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infection during the pre-Omicron period and 1037 cases during the Omicron period (0.17 vs. 0.49 cases per 100 admissions). Patients with hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infection were older and had more comorbid conditions than those without. During the pre-Omicron period, hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with increased risk for ICU admission, increased need for high-flow oxygen, longer time to discharge (median difference, 4.7 days [95% CI, 2.9 to 6.6 days]), and higher mortality (risk ratio, 2.0 [CI, 1.1 to 3.8]) versus matched control participants. During the Omicron period, hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infection remained associated with increased risk for ICU admission and increased time to discharge (median difference, 4.2 days [CI, 3.6 to 5.0 days]). The association with increased hospital mortality was attenuated but still significant (risk ratio, 1.6 [CI, 1.2 to 2.3]).

LIMITATION

Residual confounding may be present.

CONCLUSION

Hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infection during the Omicron period remains associated with increased morbidity and mortality.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Harvard Medical School Department of Population Medicine.

Association of institutional masking policies with healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 infections in Swiss acute care hospitals during the BA.4/5 wave (CH-SUR study): a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

In the initial phase of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, masking has been widely accepted in healthcare institutions to mitigate the risk of healthcare-associated infection. Evidence, however, is still scant and the role of masks in preventing healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 acquisition remains unclear.We investigated the association of variation in institutional mask policies with healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 infections in acute care hospitals in Switzerland during the BA.4/5 2022 wave.

METHODS

SARS-CoV-2 infections in hospitalized patients between June 1 and September 5, 2022, were obtained from the "Hospital-based surveillance of COVID-19 in Switzerland"-database and classified as healthcare- or community-associated based on time of disease onset. Institutions provided information regarding institutional masking policies for healthcare workers and other prevention policies. The percentage of healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 infections was calculated per institution and per type of mask policy. The association of healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 infections with mask policies was tested using a negative binominal mixed-effect model.

RESULTS

We included 2'980 SARS-CoV-2 infections from 13 institutions, 444 (15%) were classified as healthcare-associated. Between June 20 and June 30, 2022, six (46%) institutions switched to a more stringent mask policy. The percentage of healthcare-associated infections subsequently declined in institutions with policy switch but not in the others. In particular, the switch from situative masking (standard precautions) to general masking of HCW in contact with patients was followed by a strong reduction of healthcare-associated infections (rate ratio 0.39, 95% CI 0.30-0.49). In contrast, when compared across hospitals, the percentage of health-care associated infections was not related to mask policies.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest switching to a more stringent mask policy may be beneficial during increases of healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 infections at an institutional level.

Integrated Genomic and Social Network Analyses of SARS-CoV-2 Transmission in the Healthcare Setting

BACKGROUND

Infection prevention (IP) measures are designed to mitigate the transmission of pathogens in healthcare. Using large-scale viral genomic and social network analyses, we determined if IP measures used during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic were adequate in protecting healthcare workers (HCWs) and patients from acquiring SARS-CoV-2.

METHODS

We performed retrospective cross-sectional analyses of viral genomics from all available SARS-CoV-2 viral samples collected at UC San Diego Health and social network analysis using the electronic medical record to derive temporospatial overlap of infections among related viromes and supplemented with contact tracing data. The outcome measure was any instance of healthcare transmission, defined as cases with closely related viral genomes and epidemiological connection within the healthcare setting during the infection window. Between November 2020 through January 2022, 12 933 viral genomes were obtained from 35 666 patients and HCWs.

RESULTS

Among 5112 SARS-CoV-2 viral samples sequenced from the second and third waves of SARS-CoV-2 (pre-Omicron), 291 pairs were derived from persons with a plausible healthcare overlap. Of these, 34 pairs (12%) were phylogenetically linked: 19 attributable to household and 14 to healthcare transmission. During the Omicron wave, 2106 contact pairs among 7821 sequences resulted in 120 (6%) related pairs among 32 clusters, of which 10 were consistent with healthcare transmission. Transmission was more likely to occur in shared spaces in the older hospital compared with the newer hospital (2.54 vs 0.63 transmission events per 1000 admissions, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

IP strategies were effective at identifying and preventing healthcare SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

Lessons From the COVID-19 Pandemic: Updating Our Approach to Masking in Health Care Facilities

The COVID-19 pandemic has upended societal norms and changed the way the health risks associated with respiratory viral infections are viewed. In this commentary, the authors advocate for mindfulness of continuing areas of uncertainty along with integration of the lessons learned into hospital-based practices to prevent harm to vulnerable patients rather than reverting to suboptimal prepandemic behaviors.

Embracing dynamic public health policy impacts in infectious diseases responses: leveraging implementation science to improve practice

Rationale

The host-pathogen relationship is inherently dynamic and constantly evolving. Applying an implementation science lens to policy evaluation suggests that policy impacts are variable depending upon key implementation outcomes (feasibility, acceptability, appropriateness costs) and conditions and contexts.

COVID-19 case study

Experiences with non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) including masking, testing, and social distancing/business and school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic response highlight the importance of considering public health policy impacts through an implementation science lens of constantly evolving contexts, conditions, evidence, and public perceptions. As implementation outcomes (feasibility, acceptability) changed, the effectiveness of these interventions changed thereby altering public health policy impact. Sustainment of behavioral change may be a key factor determining the duration of effectiveness and ultimate impact of pandemic policy recommendations, particularly for interventions that require ongoing compliance at the level of the individual.

Practical framework for assessing and evaluating pandemic policy

Updating public health policy recommendations as more data and alternative interventions become available is the evidence-based policy approach and grounded in principles of implementation science and dynamic sustainability. Achieving the ideal of real-time policy updates requires improvements in public health data collection and analysis infrastructure and a shift in public health messaging to incorporate uncertainty and the necessity of ongoing changes. In this review, the Dynamic Infectious Diseases Public Health Response Framework is presented as a model with a practical tool for iteratively incorporating implementation outcomes into public health policy design with the aim of sustaining benefits and identifying when policies are no longer functioning as intended and need to be adapted or de-implemented.

Conclusions and implications

Real-time decision making requires sensitivity to conditions on the ground and adaptation of interventions at all levels. When asking about the public health effectiveness and impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions, the focus should be on when, how, and for how long they can achieve public health impact. In the future, rather than focusing on models of public health intervention effectiveness that assume static impacts, policy impacts should be considered as dynamic with ongoing re-evaluation as conditions change to meet the ongoing needs of the ultimate end-user of the intervention: the public.

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.