Publications of the Week, June 2
First review of all available evidence

2020-06-02

SARS-CoV-2: Physical distancing and face and eye protection in preventing viral transmission

Chu DK, Akl EA, Duda S, Solo K, Yaacoub S, Schünemann HJ; COVID-19 Systematic Urgent Review Group Effort (SURGE) study authors. Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. Published online June 1, 2020. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31142-9. Accessed June 2, 2020.

Click here for an interview with Dr Derek Chu, the first author of the study.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which is responsible for the current pandemic and causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is spread from person to person through close contact. Current evidence indicates that the mode of transmission is by large respiratory droplets at mucosal sites and potentially through fine respiratory aerosols. It is uncertain whether and to what extent person-to-person physical distancing and barrier methods, specifically facial masks or eyewear, will prevent or limit viral transmission.

This systematic review and meta-analysis, funded by the World Health Organization (WHO), assessed the effect of physical distancing and the use of masks and eye protection on the transmission of 3 coronaviruses: SARS-CoV-2, responsible for COVID-19; SARS-CoV-1, responsible for SARS; and MERS-CoV, responsible for Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). There were 44 observational comparative studies included (no randomized controlled trials) that assessed health-care and non–health-care (community-based) settings, totaling 25,697 patients from 16 countries. The studies were assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology.

The main findings:

  • Virus transmission was lower with physical distancing ≥1 meter than with <1 meter, with an adjusted odds ratio (AOR) of 0.18 (95% CI, 0.09-0.38). Virus transmission decreased as a function of increasing distance, as expressed by a change in the relative risk (RR) for transmission per 1 meter of distance of 2.02 (95% CI, 1.08-3.76).
  • Virus transmission was lower with the use of any facemask, with an AOR of 0.15 (95% CI, 0.07-0.34). However, the use of N95 or similar facemasks provided a lower risk for viral transmission (AOR, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.004-0.300) than disposable surgical or reusable 12- to 16-layer cotton masks (AOR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.17-0.61).
  • Virus transmission was lower with the use of eye protection (goggles and face shields, with one study using eyeglasses), with an AOR of 0.22 (95% CI, 0.12-0.39).

In terms of strength of evidence, studies assessing physical distancing provided moderate certainty of evidence, whereas those assessing facemasks and eye protection provided low certainty of evidence.

This meta-analysis suggests that effective methods used to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 include physical distancing of at least 1 meter, with added benefit of 2-meter distancing; the use of facemasks, especially N95 or similar type; and the use of eye protection.

Infographics

Click to view the full image.

Infographic summarizing findings of The Lancet publication courtesy of the meta-analysis authors.

Click to view the full image.

Infographic summarizing findings of The Lancet publication.

See also
  • COVID-19: Optimal physical distancing, masks, and eye protection Dr Derek Chu, clinician scientist at McMaster University, discusses the just-published meta-analysis from The Lancet that reviews evidence for using physical distancing, facemasks, and eyewear to prevent COVID-19 spread.
  • Publications of the Week, May 27
    Reports on remdesivir
    A digest of noteworthy publications curated by editors from McMaster University. This week’s focus: first RCT data on remdesivir use in COVID-19.
  • COVID-19: To treat or not to treat? May 15 update Dr Mark Crowther, chair of the Department of Medicine at McMaster University and past president of the Anticoagulation Forum, offers an expert overview of our current understanding of thrombosis and anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19.
  • Publications of the Week, April 24
    COVID-19 treatment guidelines
    A digest of noteworthy publications curated by editors from McMaster University. This week’s focus: COVID-19 treatment guidelines from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH).
  • Publications of the Week, November 9 A digest of noteworthy publications curated by editors from McMaster University. This week’s focus: criteria for the clinical diagnosis of brain death (part 2).
  • Publications of the Week, October 26 A digest of noteworthy publications curated by editors from McMaster University. This week’s focus: criteria for the clinical diagnosis of brain death (part 1).
  • COVID-19: Droplets, aerosols, and masks Dr Mark Loeb, professor in the Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine at McMaster University, joins Dr Roman Jaeschke to clarify the difference between droplets vs aerosols and surgical masks vs N95 respirators.
  • Publications of the Week, July 27 A digest of noteworthy publications curated by editors from McMaster University. This week’s focus: the HALT-IT trial, investigating the use of tranexamic acid in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding.
  • Publications of the Week, July 13 A digest of noteworthy publications curated by editors from McMaster University. This week’s focus: triple vs dual therapy with or without glucocorticoids in moderate to very severe COPD.
  • Publications of the Week, June 29 A digest of noteworthy publications curated by editors from McMaster University. This week’s focus: benefits of comprehensive disease-modifying pharmacologic therapies in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

We would love to hear from you

Comments, mistakes, suggestions?