FACE MASK CONTAMINATION DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIA. A STUDY ON PATIENTS RECEIVING INTRAVITREAL INJECTIONS

Medical Face Masks Do Not Affect Acid-Base Balance Yet Might Facilitate the Transmission of Staphylococcus aureus in Hospital Settings during the COVID-19 Pandemic

INTRODUCTION

Due to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic, the wearing of masks has become a common phenomenon. Most of the undesirable effects of using a protective face covering are usually related to the prolonged time of its wearing, and the adverse consequences of face coverings should be considered two-fold. The aim of the study was to evaluate the rate of contamination of the three types of face coverings (surgical, N95, and FFP2 masks) with the microorganism-aerobic bacteria, yeasts, and molds-after the 3 h exposure time. The study aimed to investigate the effects of wearing FFP2 masks (KN95) on respiratory function and the acid-base balance of the human body.

RESULTS

The presence of S. aureus was confirmed in both nasal carriers and non-carriers which may demonstrate the cross-contamination and spread of this bacterium via hands. S. aureus was found on external and internal surfaces of face masks of each type, and therefore could also be transmitted via hands from external sources. The 3 h exposure time is not sufficient for Gram-negative rods and mold contamination. Moreover, there were no significant differences in most of the parameters studied between the first and second examinations, both in spirometry and capillary blood gas analysis (p > 0.05).

Legal obligation in the general population: face mask influence on endophthalmitis after intravitreal injection

PURPOSE

To investigate whether compulsory face masking in public life changes the incidence or pattern of post-injection endophthalmitis (PIE).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All injections of bevacizumab, ranibizumab, aflibercept, dexamethasone or triamcinolone between 01/01/2015 and 12/31/2021 at the University Eye Clinic of Tuebingen were included in this retrospective analysis. The injection procedure itself was unchanged since 2015 and included the use of a sterile drape covering the head up to the shoulders which prevents airflow toward the eye. Furthermore, all staff wore a face mask and gloves at all times. The two study periods were defined by the introduction of a compulsory face masking rule in public life (01/01/2015 until 04/27/2020 vs. 04/28/2020 until 12/31/2021).

RESULTS

A total of 83,543 injections were performed in the tertiary eye clinic, associated with a total of 20 PIE (0.024%, 1/4177 injections). Of these, thirteen PIE were documented during the pre-pandemic period (0.021%, 1/4773 injections) and seven PIE during the pandemic period (0.033%, 1/3071 injections). No significant difference in PIE risk was observed (p = 0.49), and there was no case of oral flora associated PIE.

CONCLUSION

Although some potential confounders (wearing time, skin flora) could not be considered, there was no clear signal that the introduction of compulsory face masking in public life did alter the risk for PIE in our patient population. Three and six months after PIE, no difference in visual acuity was detectable between the two study periods.

Face mask use and effects on the ocular surface health: A comprehensive review

In the COVID-19 period, face masks increased exponentially. Several studies suggest that the rise in ocular discomfort symptoms during the pandemic is mostly part of dry eye disease and that these are due to the effect of face masks, resulting in the newly described term MADE, for "mask-associated dry eye". The most commonly proposed mechanism states that wearing a face mask creates an unnatural upward airflow towards the ocular surface during expiration, although the increased temperature, humidity and levels of carbon dioxide of the exhaled air, stress, increased use of video display terminals, as well as changes in the ocular microbiota may contribute. Evidence supports that the use of face masks causes an increase in dry eye disease symptoms, a decreased tear break-up time, corneal epithelial trauma, periocular temperature changes and inflammatory markers secretion. Given that the use of masks may be frequent in some settings in the near future, it is important to establish its effects and consequences on the ocular surface.

Are intravitreal injections essential during the COVID-19 pandemic? Global preferred practice patterns and practical recommendations

Tertiary outpatient ophthalmology clinics are high-risk environments for COVID-19 transmission, especially retina clinics, where regular follow-up is needed for elderly patients with multiple comorbidities. Intravitreal injection therapy (IVT) for chronic macular diseases, is one of the most common procedures performed, associated with a significant burden of care because of the vigorous treatment regimen associated with multiple investigations. While minimizing the risk of COVID-19 infection transmission is a priority, this must be balanced against the continued provision of sight-saving ophthalmic care to patients at risk of permanent vision loss. This review aims to give evidence-based guidelines on managing IVT during the COVID-19 pandemic in common macular diseases such as age-related macular degeneration, diabetic macula edema and retinal vascular disease and to report on how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected IVT practices worldwide.

To illustrate some real-world examples, 18 participants in the International Retina Collaborative, from 15 countries and across four continents, were surveyed regarding pre- and during- COVID-19 pandemic IVT practices in tertiary ophthalmic centers. The majority of centers reported a reduction in the number of appointments to reduce the risk of the spread of COVID-19 with varying changes to their IVT regimen to treat various macula diseases. Due to the constantly evolving nature of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the uncertainty about the normal resumption of health services, we suggest that new solutions for eye healthcare provision, like telemedicine, may be adopted in the future when we consider new long-term adaptations required to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Safety Measures for Maintaining Low Endophthalmitis Rate after Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Injection before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic, intravitreal injections are performed with patients wearing masks. The risk of endophthalmitis after intravitreal injection is reported to increase due to an influx of exhaled air containing oral bacteria from the upper part of the mask onto the ocular surface. We retrospectively investigated the incidence of endophthalmitis when intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections were performed using the same infection control measures before and during the pandemic. Vitreoretinal specialists performed intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents in the outpatient room of a university hospital. Infection control measures before and during the pandemic included covering the patient’s eye with adhesive face drape and irrigating the ocular surface with 0.25% povidone-iodine before draping, and immediately before and after injection. Before the COVID-19 pandemic (February 2016 to December 2019), one case of endophthalmitis occurred among 31,173 injections performed (0.0032%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.000008–0.017872%). During the COVID-19 pandemic (January 2020 to August 2021), one case of endophthalmitis occurred among 14,725 injections performed (0.0068%; 95% CI, 0.000017–0.037832%). There was no significant difference between the two periods (Fisher’s exact test: p = 0.5387). Even during the COVID-19 pandemic, very low incidence of endophthalmitis after intravitreal injection can be maintained by implementing basic infection prophylactic measures, including face draping and 0.25% povidone-iodine irrigation, established before COVID-19 pandemic.