Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34730768›Full record

ReviewRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2021

Reusing and/or reprocessing the N95 face respirator mask or equivalent: An integrative review.

Elucir Gir, Mayra Gonçalves Menegueti, Laelson Rochelle Milanês Sousa, Natália Maria Vieira Pereira-Caldeira, Milton Jorge de Carvalho, Renata Karina Reis

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 39% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elucir GirUniversidade de São Paulo, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, PAHO/WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3757-4900
Mayra Gonçalves MeneguetiUniversidade de São Paulo, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, PAHO/WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7955-4484
Laelson Rochelle Milanês SousaUniversidade de São Paulo, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, PAHO/WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6018-5439
Natália Maria Vieira Pereira-CaldeiraUniversidade de São Paulo, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, PAHO/WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4231-7116
Milton Jorge de CarvalhoCentro Universitário Saúde ABC, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC, Santo André, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6002-1944
Renata Karina ReisUniversidade de São Paulo, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, PAHO/WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0681-4721
Universidade de São Paulo · BRFaculdade de Medicina do ABC · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveto analyze the scientific evidence available on the different reprocessing methods and the necessary conditions for reuse of the N95 face respirator mask or equivalent.

methodan integrative literature review. The PICO strategy was used to elaborate the question. The search was conducted in four databases: PubMed, SciVerse Scopus, WebofScience and EMBASE, considering any period of time.

resultsa total of 32 studies were included from the 561 studies identified, and they were presented in two categories: "Conditions for reuse" and "Reprocessing the masks". Of the evaluated research studies, seven(21.8%) addressed the reuse of the N95 face respirator mask or equivalent and 25(78.1%) evaluated different reprocessing methods, namely: ultraviolet germicidal irradiation(14); hydrogen peroxide(8); vapor methods(14); using dry heat(5) and chemical methods(sodium hypochlorite[6], ethanol[4] and sodium chloride with sodium bicarbonate and dimethyldioxirane[1]). We emphasize that different methods were used in one same article.

conclusionno evidence was found to support safe reprocessing of face respirator masks. In addition, reuse is contraindicated due to the risk of self-contamination and inadequate sealing.

Indexed as

COVID-19Equipment ReuseDecontaminationHumansSARS-CoV-2Ventilators, Mechanical

Identifiers

PMID34730768
PMCPMC8570250
OpenAlexW3210942258

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.