The influence of gender and ethnicity on facemasks and respiratory protective equipment fit: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Issue 11 (11th November 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Chopra, Jagrati; Abiakam, Nkemjika; Kim, Hansung; Metcalf, Cheryl; Worsley, Peter; Cheong, Ying
• Is Part Of: BMJ global health. Volume 6:Issue 11(2021)
• Publication Date: 2021-11-11
• Subjects: COVID-19 -- respiratory infections -- prevention strategies -- health policies and all other topics; World health -- Periodicals; 362.105
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005537
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2059-7908

Abstract

Abstract : Introduction: Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people are disproportionately affected by COVID-19. Respiratory protective equipment (RPE) has conventionally been developed for a predominantly white male population that does not represent the healthcare workforce. The literature was reviewed to determine the protection offered to female and BAME users. Methods: Five databases were searched. Eligible studies related to respirator fit in the context of anthropometrics, gender and ethnicity. Meta-analysis was performed for gender-based anthropometric differences. A priori protocol registration was not performed. Results: 32 studies were included and anthropometric data was extracted from 15 studies. Meta-analysis revealed 14 anthropometric measurements were significantly smaller for females. Mean differences ranged from 0.37 mm to 22.05 mm. Gender-based anthropometric differences did not always translate to lower fit factor scores, with 12 studies reporting worse performance and fit for females and 10 reporting no gender effect. No studies provided disaggregate anthropometric data by ethnic group. Pass rates (PR) were low or moderate in 12 BAME or mixed-ethnicity cohorts. 14 studies reported associations between facial dimensions (FD) and respirator fit. Three comparative studies showed lower PR among selective BAME people. 18 studies reported RPE performance differed with model and design. Most studies did not prespecify inclusion/exclusion criteria. Small sample size and lack of justification or power calculations was a concern. Significant heterogeneity in study designs limited comparisons, particularly relating to respirator selection or availability and defining study outcomes relating to RPE performance. Conclusion: The literature reports on largely Caucasian or single ethnic populations, and BAME people remain under-represented, limiting comparisons between ethnic groups. Facial anthropometrics vary between gender and likely between ethnicity, which may contribute to lower PR among females and ethnic minorities, particularly Asians. There is a need for studies including a broader spectrum of ethnicities and for consideration of female and BAME users during RPE development.