ArticleDermatology and therapy2022
Maskne-Dermatosis of a Pandemic. A Survey on the Impact of PPE on Facial Skin Among HCW and N-HCW in Poland.
Article in Dermatology and therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Current status and influencing factors of knowledge, attitude and practice of personal protection of healthcare workers in isolation wards of COVID-19 designated hospitals.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Facemask acne attenuation through modulation of indirect microbiome interactions.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDuring the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, personal protective equipment (PPE) became the new social norm for preventing COVID-19, but with an impact on the skin barrier. This study aimed to analyze the factors influencing PPE wearing, following hygiene rules, and effect on facial skin, including onset or exacerbation of dermatoses among healthcare workers (HCW) and non-healthcare workers (N-HCW).
methodsIn 2020, an original survey was carried out among 300 N-HCW and 60 HCW with 60 questions about using PPE and skin lesions experienced before and during the pandemic. Cross-sectional statistical analysis was completed to assess the interplay between environmental factors and maskne occurrence.
resultsThe N-HCW group included 74% females and 26% males with an average age 24.67 ± 0.74. Among HCW respondents 91.7% were women and 8.3% were men, with an average age of 30.07 ± 0.36. All participants used PPE. Volunteers for N-HCW mainly chose a disposable (53.3%) and reusable masks (37.3%), while HCW preferred surgical (66.7%) and FFP2/FFP3/N95 masks (30%) and almost never used reusable masks (3.3%). HCW mainly spent 5-8 h with PPE, and N-HCW spent 1-4 h with PPE/day. Respondents with dermatological problems before the pandemic were more aware of the maskne and paid more attention to hygiene with PPE. Significantly, HCW experienced more severe facial skin lesions than N-HCW (p < 0.0001). There was statistical significance in following the basic hygienic rules of wearing PPE between both groups, where HCW practiced them more.
conclusionsMaskne is a current and urgent problem to be cured. HCW should receive help if they develop maskne, such as limited time spent in PPE and treatment of the results of wearing it, as it is the main trigger of developing maskne. In addition, education about the correct use and choice of PPE should be improved.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.