Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control (Feb 2022)

Impact of respirator versus surgical masks on SARS-CoV-2 acquisition in healthcare workers: a prospective multicentre cohort

  • Sabine Haller,
  • Sabine Güsewell,
  • Thomas Egger,
  • Giulia Scanferla,
  • Reto Thoma,
  • Onicio B. Leal-Neto,
  • Domenica Flury,
  • Angela Brucher,
  • Eva Lemmenmeier,
  • J. Carsten Möller,
  • Philip Rieder,
  • Markus Rütti,
  • Reto Stocker,
  • Danielle Vuichard-Gysin,
  • Benedikt Wiggli,
  • Ulrike Besold,
  • Stefan P. Kuster,
  • Allison McGeer,
  • Lorenz Risch,
  • Matthias Schlegel,
  • Andrée Friedl,
  • Pietro Vernazza,
  • Christian R. Kahlert,
  • Philipp Kohler

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-022-01070-6
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 11, no. 1
pp. 1 – 11

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background There is insufficient evidence regarding the role of respirators in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We analysed the impact of filtering facepiece class 2 (FFP2) versus surgical masks on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition among Swiss healthcare workers (HCW). Methods Our prospective multicentre cohort enrolled HCW from June to August 2020. Participants were asked about COVID-19 risk exposures/behaviours, including preferentially worn mask type when caring for COVID-19 patients outside of aerosol-generating procedures. The impact of FFP2 on (1) self-reported SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal PCR/rapid antigen tests captured during weekly surveys, and (2) SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion between baseline and January/February 2021 was assessed. Results We enrolled 3259 participants from nine healthcare institutions, whereof 716 (22%) preferentially used FFP2. Among these, 81/716 (11%) reported a SARS-CoV-2-positive swab, compared to 352/2543 (14%) surgical mask users; seroconversion was documented in 85/656 (13%) FFP2 and 426/2255 (19%) surgical mask users. Adjusted for baseline characteristics, COVID-19 exposure, and risk behaviour, FFP2 use was non-significantly associated with decreased risk for SARS-CoV-2-positive swab (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.8, 95% CI 0.6–1.0) and seroconversion (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.7, 95% CI 0.5–1.0); household exposure was the strongest risk factor (aHR 10.1, 95% CI 7.5–13.5; aOR 5.0, 95% CI 3.9–6.5). In subgroup analysis, FFP2 use was clearly protective among those with frequent (> 20 patients) COVID-19 exposure (aHR 0.7 for positive swab, 95% CI 0.5–0.8; aOR 0.6 for seroconversion, 95% CI 0.4–1.0). Conclusions Respirators compared to surgical masks may convey additional protection from SARS-CoV-2 for HCW with frequent exposure to COVID-19 patients.

Keywords