Laboratory-confirmed Respiratory Infection Research Articles

Effectiveness of Mask-Wearing on Respiratory Illness Transmission in Community Settings: A Rapid Review.

Respiratory illnesses, including coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), have resulted in millions of deaths globally. Guidance on mask-wearing in community settings has been inconsistent. This review examined the effectiveness of mask-wearing on respiratory virus transmission in community settings. A search was conducted for English language reports of randomized controlled trials of mask-wearing in the community and effect on laboratory-confirmed respiratory infections or influenza-like illness. Investigators abstracted study characteristics and assessed bias. Meta-analysis was conducted to calculate pooled risk estimates. Eleven studies were included. In 7 studies that evaluated influenza-like illness symptoms as an outcome (3029 participants), this study found mask-wearing associated with a decreased risk of influenza-like illness (overall risk ratio [RR], 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 0.96). Studies examining laboratory-confirmed respiratory infections as an outcome (10,531 participants) showed no statistically significant association between mask-wearing and infections (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.60-1.80). However, masking combined with enhanced hand hygiene was associated with a decreased risk for both influenza-like illness symptoms (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.51-1.51) and laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.52-1.18). Masking in community settings decreases transmission of influenza-like illness. Mask-wearing combined with enhanced hand hygiene reduces transmission of influenza-like illness and laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection.

The need of health policy perspective to protect Healthcare Workers during COVID-19 pandemic. A GRADE rapid review on the N95 respirators effectiveness.

Protecting Health Care Workers (HCWs) during routine care of suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients is of paramount importance to halt the SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2) pandemic. The WHO, ECDC and CDC have issued conflicting guidelines on the use of respiratory filters (N95) by HCWs. We searched PubMed, Embase and The Cochrane Library from the inception to March 21, 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing N95 respirators versus surgical masks for prevention of COVID-19 or any other respiratory infection among HCWs. The grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) was used to evaluate the quality of evidence. Four RCTs involving 8736 HCWs were included. We did not find any trial specifically on prevention of COVID-19. However, wearing N95 respirators can prevent 73 more (95% CI 46–91) clinical respiratory infections per 1000 HCWs compared to surgical masks (2 RCTs; 2594 patients; low quality of evidence). A protective effect of N95 respirators in laboratory-confirmed bacterial colonization (RR = 0.41; 95%CI 0.28–0.61) was also found. A trend in favour of N95 respirators was observed in preventing laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infections, laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, and influenza like illness. We found no direct high quality evidence on whether N95 respirators are better than surgical masks for HCWs protection from SARS-CoV-2. However, low quality evidence suggests that N95 respirators protect HCWs from clinical respiratory infections. This finding should be contemplated to decide the best strategy to support the resilience of healthcare systems facing the potentially catastrophic SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Acute myocardial infarctions and stroke triggered by laboratory-confirmed respiratory infections in Denmark, 2010 to 2016.

BackgroundSeveral studies have investigated a possible association between respiratory infection and acute myocardial infarction (MI). As both influenza and pneumococcal infections are vaccine preventable, understanding the populations affected by virus-induced cardiovascular complications is important to guide public health and clinical practice.AimThis observational study aimed to quantify the association between laboratory-confirmed respiratory bacteria or virus infections and risk of first MI or stroke, by using self-controlled case series (SCCS) analysis of anonymised linked electronic Danish health records.MethodsThe SCCS method was used to determine the relative incidence of the first event of MI and stroke occurring within 28 days after laboratory-confirmed respiratory infections compared with the baseline time period.ResultsIn the age and season adjusted analyses for first acute MI, the incidence ratios (IR) of a MI event occurring during the risk period were significantly elevated following a Streptococcus pneumoniae infection with values of 20.1, 11.0 and 4.9 during 1–3, 4–7 and 8–14 days, respectively and following respiratory virus infection with values of 15.2, 4.5 and 4.4 during 1–3, 8–14 and 15–28 days, respectively. The significantly elevated IRs for stroke following an S. pneumoniae infection were 25.5 and 6.3 during 1–3 and 8–14 days, respectively and following respiratory virus infection 8.3, 7.8 and 6.2 during 1–3, 4–7 and 8–14 days, respectively.ConclusionThis study suggested a significant cardiovascular event triggering effect following infection with S. pneumoniae and respiratory viruses (mainly influenza), indicating the importance of protection against vaccine-preventable respiratory infections.

Laboratory-confirmed respiratory infections as triggers for acute myocardial infarction and stroke: a self-controlled case series analysis of national linked datasets from Scotland.

While acute respiratory tract infections can trigger cardiovascular events, the differential effect of specific organisms is unknown. This is important to guide vaccine policy.Using national infection surveillance data linked to the Scottish Morbidity Record, we identified adults with a first myocardial infarction or stroke from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2014 and a record of laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection during this period. Using self-controlled case series analysis, we generated age- and season-adjusted incidence ratios (IRs) for myocardial infarction (n=1227) or stroke (n=762) after infections compared with baseline time.We found substantially increased myocardial infarction rates in the week after Streptococcus pneumoniae and influenza virus infection: adjusted IRs for days 1–3 were 5.98 (95% CI 2.47–14.4) and 9.80 (95% CI 2.37–40.5), respectively. Rates of stroke after infection were similarly high and remained elevated to 28 days: day 1–3 adjusted IRs 12.3 (95% CI 5.48–27.7) and 7.82 (95% CI 1.07–56.9) for S. pneumoniae and influenza virus, respectively. Although other respiratory viruses were associated with raised point estimates for both outcomes, only the day 4–7 estimate for stroke reached statistical significance.We showed a marked cardiovascular triggering effect of S. pneumoniae and influenza virus, which highlights the need for adequate pneumococcal and influenza vaccine uptake. Further research is needed into vascular effects of noninfluenza respiratory viruses.

Laboratory-Confirmed Respiratory Infections as Predictors of Hospital Admission for Myocardial Infarction and Stroke: Time-Series Analysis of English Data for 2004-2015.

Acute respiratory infections are associated with increased risk of myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke; however, the role of different organisms is poorly characterized. Time-series analysis of English hospital admissions for MI and stroke (age-stratified: 45-64, 65-74, ≥75 years), laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections, and environmental data for 2004-2015. Weekly counts of admissions were modeled using multivariable Poisson regression with weekly counts of respiratory viruses (influenza, parainfluenza, rhinovirus, respiratory syncytial virus [RSV], adenovirus, or human metapneumovirus [HMPV]) investigated as predictors. We controlled for seasonality, long-term trends, and environmental factors. Weekly hospital admissions in adults aged ≥45 years averaged 1347 (interquartile range [IQR], 1217-1541) for MI and 1175 (IQR, 1023-1395) for stroke. Respiratory infections ranged from 11 cases per week (IQR, 5-53) for influenza to 55 (IQR, 7-127) for rhinovirus. In the adjusted models, all viruses except parainfluenza were significantly associated with MI and ischemic stroke admissions in those aged ≥75. Among 65- to 74-year-olds, adenovirus, rhinovirus, and RSV were associated with MI but not ischemic stroke admissions. Respiratory infections were not associated with MI or ischemic stroke in people aged 45-64 years, nor with hemorrhagic stroke in any age group. An estimated 0.4%-5.7% of MI and ischemic stroke admissions may be attributable to respiratory infection. We identified small but strongly significant associations in the timing of respiratory infection (with HMPV, RSV, influenza, rhinovirus, and adenovirus) and MI or ischemic stroke hospitalizations in the elderly. NCT02984280.

Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Conflicting recommendations exist related to which facial protection should be used by health care workers to prevent transmission of acute respiratory infections, including pandemic influenza. We performed a systematic review of both clinical and surrogate exposure data comparing N95 respirators and surgical masks for the prevention of transmissible acute respiratory infections. We searched various electronic databases and the grey literature for relevant studies published from January 1990 to December 2014. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies and case-control studies that included data on health care workers wearing N95 respirators and surgical masks to prevent acute respiratory infections were included in the meta-analysis. Surrogate exposure studies comparing N95 respirators and surgical masks using manikins or adult volunteers under simulated conditions were summarized separately. Outcomes from clinical studies were laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, influenza-like illness and workplace absenteeism. Outcomes from surrogate exposure studies were filter penetration, face-seal leakage and total inward leakage. We identified 6 clinical studies (3 RCTs, 1 cohort study and 2 case-control studies) and 23 surrogate exposure studies. In the meta-analysis of the clinical studies, we found no significant difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in associated risk of (a) laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection (RCTs: odds ratio [OR] 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-1.24; cohort study: OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.03-6.41; case-control studies: OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.25-3.36); (b) influenza-like illness (RCTs: OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.19-1.41); or (c) reported workplace absenteeism (RCT: OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.57-1.50). In the surrogate exposure studies, N95 respirators were associated with less filter penetration, less face-seal leakage and less total inward leakage under laboratory experimental conditions, compared with surgical masks. Although N95 respirators appeared to have a protective advantage over surgical masks in laboratory settings, our meta-analysis showed that there were insufficient data to determine definitively whether N95 respirators are superior to surgical masks in protecting health care workers against transmissible acute respiratory infections in clinical settings.