Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses - resource use implications: a systematic review.
Year: 2012
Type: article
Study design: Systematic Review
Abstract: Viral epidemics or pandemics of acute respiratory infections like influenza or severe acute respiratory syndrome (or SARS) have each posed global threats over the past decade.1,2 The World Health Organization (WHO) interim guidelines document Infection prevention and control of epidemic- and pandemic-prone acute respiratory diseases in health care has provided infection control guidance to help prevent the transmission of acute respiratory diseases in health care, with an emphasis on acute respiratory diseases that have epidemic or pandemic potential or may constitute a public health emergency of potential concern.3 The WHO current guidelines were published in 2007 and, since then, new evidence on some specific and controversial areas has emerged, necessitating an update of the guidelines.
It has been demonstrated that implementing barriers to transmission, such as physical interventions (screening at ports of entry, isolation, quarantine, social distancing, barriers, personal protection [e.g., wearing masks, gloves, and gowns], hand hygiene), can be effective in containing respiratory virus epidemics, or in health care settings such as hospital wards.4 Given that physical interventions can be instituted rapidly, are readily available, and may be independent of any specific type of infective agent, including novel viruses, they have the potential for widespread use. There is a growing interest in including economic considerations in practice guidelines for physical interventions to allow users and policy-makers to evaluate the use of resources and costs within their particular setting.
This systematic review studies the resource use implications associated with physical interventions used for interrupting or reducing the spread of respiratory viruses, and serves to inform decision-makers when considering these interventions. It complements the updated Cochrane Review, Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses (Jefferson et al., 2011),4 which shows that physical interventions to interrupt or delay the spread of viruses are effective in protecting against viral transmission.
Objective
The objective of the report was to answer the following research questions:
What are the resource use implications (e.g., number of units) associated with physical interventions (e.g., screening at ports of entry, isolation, quarantine, social distancing, barriers, personal protection [wearing masks, gloves, and gown], hand hygiene) used for the interruption of or reduction in the spread of respiratory viruses?
What are the economic implications (e.g., total cost and cost-effectiveness ratios) associated with physical barriers used for interrupting or reducing the spread of respiratory viruses?
Source: Europe PMC (PubMed Central)
Language: English
Subfield: Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
Field: Medicine
Domain: Health Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W307867600