当前位置: X-MOL 学术BMJ Open Ophthalmol. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Potential impact of oral flora dispersal on patients wearing face masks when undergoing ophthalmologic procedures
BMJ Open Ophthalmology Pub Date : 2021-10-01 , DOI: 10.1136/bmjophth-2021-000804
Santiago Angaramo 1 , Janice C Law 1, 2 , Alexander Spyros Maris 3 , Jonathan Edward Schmitz 3 , Yuhan Liu 4 , Qingxia Chen 2, 4 , Amy Chomsky 1, 2
Affiliation  

Objective The purpose of this study is to investigate the amount of oral flora dispersion towards the ocular surface in relation to various face mask scenarios. Methods and analysis Thirty participants were recruited for this prospective cross-sectional study. Each participant was seated and instructed to hold a blood agar plate perpendicular to the bridge of their nose and facing downward. Participants then partook in three unique face mask scenarios: no face mask, surgical face mask and surgical face mask with tape securing the superior edge. During each scenario, participants were instructed to forcefully exhale for 5 s three times. The primary outcome measure was the number of colony-forming units (CFUs) grown on each face mask scenario-specific plate. Results Thirty participants were recruited for the study, and a total of 90 chocolate agar plates were successfully incubated. The proportion of detecting any CFU was 6.67% (95% CI: 0.818% to 22.1%) for no mask scenario, 0% (95% CI: 0% to 11.6%) for mask scenario and 3.33% (95% CI: 0.0844% to 17.2%) for mask-taped scenario. The mean differences in proportion of detecting any CFU were 3.33% (95% CI: 0% to 10%, p=0.309) for no mask versus mask taped, 3.35% (95% CI: 0% to 10%, p=0.307) for mask taped versus mask and 6.68% (95% CI: 0% to 16.7%, p=0.142) for no mask versus mask. Conclusion This study showed no difference in bacterial dispersion towards the ocular surface when comparing no face mask, a surgical face mask without tape or a surgical face mask with tape. Data are available upon reasonable request. Not applicable.

中文翻译:

进行眼科手术时口腔菌群扩散对戴口罩的患者的潜在影响

目的 本研究的目的是调查口腔菌群在各种面罩场景下向眼表的扩散量。方法和分析 本前瞻性横断面研究招募了 30 名参与者。每位参与者坐下并指示将血琼脂板垂直于他们的鼻梁并朝下。然后,参与者参与了三种独特的面罩场景:无面罩、外科面罩和带有固定上边缘的胶带的外科面罩。在每个场景中,参与者被要求用力呼气 3 次,每次 5 秒。主要结果测量是在每个面罩场景特定板上生长的菌落形成单位 (CFU) 的数量。结果 招募了 30 名参与者进行研究,共成功培养90块巧克力琼脂板。无口罩情况下检测到任何 CFU 的比例为 6.67%(95% CI:0.818% 至 22.1%),口罩情况下为 0%(95% CI:0% 至 11.6%)和 3.33%(95% CI:0.0844) % 至 17.2%) 用于面膜胶带的情况。检测到任何 CFU 的比例平均差异为 3.33%(95% CI:0% 至 10%,p=0.309),无面罩与贴面罩相比,3.35%(95% CI:0% 至 10%,p=0.307) ) 用于胶带与面罩的比较,6.68% (95% CI: 0% to 16.7%, p=0.142) 用于无面罩与面罩。结论 本研究表明,在比较不带口罩、不带胶带的外科口罩或带胶带的外科口罩时,细菌向眼表的扩散没有差异。可根据合理要求提供数据。不适用。67% (95% CI: 0.818% to 22.1%) 无面罩场景,0% (95% CI: 0% to 11.6%) 面罩场景和 3.33% (95% CI: 0.0844% to 17.2%) 面罩- 录音场景。检测到任何 CFU 的比例平均差异为 3.33%(95% CI:0% 至 10%,p=0.309),无面罩与贴面罩相比,3.35%(95% CI:0% 至 10%,p=0.307) ) 用于胶带与面罩的比较,6.68% (95% CI: 0% to 16.7%, p=0.142) 用于无面罩与面罩。结论 本研究表明,在比较不带口罩、不带胶带的外科口罩或带胶带的外科口罩时,细菌向眼表的扩散没有差异。可根据合理要求提供数据。不适用。67% (95% CI: 0.818% to 22.1%) 无面罩场景,0% (95% CI: 0% to 11.6%) 面罩场景和 3.33% (95% CI: 0.0844% to 17.2%) 面罩- 录音场景。检测到任何 CFU 的比例平均差异为 3.33%(95% CI:0% 至 10%,p=0.309),无面罩与贴面罩相比,3.35%(95% CI:0% 至 10%,p=0.307) ) 用于胶带与面罩的比较,6.68% (95% CI: 0% to 16.7%, p=0.142) 用于无面罩与面罩。结论 本研究表明,在比较不带口罩、不带胶带的外科口罩或带胶带的外科口罩时,细菌向眼表的扩散没有差异。可根据合理要求提供数据。不适用。检测到任何 CFU 的比例平均差异为 3.33%(95% CI:0% 至 10%,p=0.309),无面罩与贴面罩相比,3.35%(95% CI:0% 至 10%,p=0.307) ) 用于胶带与面罩的比较,6.68% (95% CI: 0% to 16.7%, p=0.142) 用于无面罩与面罩。结论 本研究表明,在比较不带口罩、不带胶带的外科口罩或带胶带的外科口罩时,细菌向眼表的扩散没有差异。可根据合理要求提供数据。不适用。检测到任何 CFU 的比例平均差异为 3.33%(95% CI:0% 至 10%,p=0.309),无面罩与贴面罩相比,3.35%(95% CI:0% 至 10%,p=0.307) ) 用于胶带与面罩的比较,6.68% (95% CI: 0% to 16.7%, p=0.142) 用于无面罩与面罩。结论 本研究表明,在比较不带口罩、不带胶带的外科口罩或带胶带的外科口罩时,细菌向眼表的扩散没有差异。可根据合理要求提供数据。不适用。不带胶带的外科口罩或带胶带的外科口罩。可根据合理要求提供数据。不适用。不带胶带的外科口罩或带胶带的外科口罩。可根据合理要求提供数据。不适用。
更新日期:2021-10-06
down
wechat
bug