Healthcare, Vol. 10, Pages 2365: Does Prolonged FFP2 Mask Use Cause Changes in Nasal Cytology? A Pilot Observational Study on Healthcare Workers

Wearing FFP2 masks has been demonstrated to be one of the most effective precautions in order to avoid SARS-CoV2 infection. Moreover, it has to be considered that wearing an FFP2 mask has become essential, especially for HC workers performing aerosol-generating procedures. Prolonged use of FFP2 masks has been reported as a risk factor for developing mainly dermatological and pneumological complications (e.g., COPD exacerbation, dermatitis) [17,18].In a recent work by Battista et al. conducted on a cohort of 185 HC workers using FFP2 masks for at least 6 consecutive hours, more than 80% of them reported nasal symptoms such as obstruction or dyspnea, dry nose or crusting, sneezing or runny nose and nasal itching [19].The aim of the current research was to evaluate if the continuous use of FFP2 masks could induce alterations in nasal cytology of HC workers in a short observational time period. Comparing the cytological data ofT0 and T1, no significant differences were observed in the examined group. A mild decrease in the number of hairy cells and muciparous cells was noticed without the severity score changing. No increase in inflammatory cell count (eosinophils, mast cells, neutrophils) was observed after 8 h wearing an FFP2 mask. These data seem to suggest that wearing an FFP2 mask does not determine observable alterations in nasal cytology in daily work. In the current study, it was observed that symptoms were present in the great majority of the volunteers; in fact, in only one case were symptoms not reported. Despite most reported symptoms in the literature related to FFP-mask wearing being nasal pressure injuries, mask-induced acne, pain in the ear lobe region and eczema [6,20], nasally specific symptoms should not be underestimated, due to their important impact on HC workers’ quality of life. The reported symptoms may be explained by the full adherence of the mask to the face and the consequent hot and wet environment that is generated [13]; the increased temperature could lead to vasodilation phenomena and as a consequence an increased blood supply to nasal mucosa, determining the hypertrophy of the nasal turbinate (nasal blockage) and submucosal inflammation that cannot be detected by nasal cytology. All these changes can alter ciliary motility, determining mucus stasis. This condition could be responsible for nasal symptoms, such as itching and rhinorrhea. However, in our study, as mentioned in Materials and Methods, ciliary motility was not studied to confirm this theory. Moreover, the referred discomfort could also be ascribed to the psychological impact of wearing such unwieldy PPE, rarely used before COVID pandemic [20].In fact, several studies demonstrate the psychological implication of wearing FFP2 masks; Carragher and Hancock observed that people are hard to recognize when wearing masks; emotional reading is substantially hampered, causing characteristic confusion of emotional states; and masks cause significant frequency-dependent transmission loss [21]; in a word, efficient communication is jeopardized [22]. All the psychological implications cited above could cause people to focus their attention on mild symptoms already experienced before the pandemic but not perceived as influencing their quality of life. Finally, it is important to remember how face masks also showed a strong impact on communication; in fact, a recent work highlights how among normal-hearing subjects, facial masks were more frequently held responsible for communication difficulties compared to social distancing, particularly due to an attenuation of sound volume and difficulties in rendering facial expressions [23]. The limits of this pilot study involve the small sample size and the short time of observation; indeed, the nasal epithelium could suffer from chronic remodeling due to a prolonged and continuous use of this personal protection equipment (PPE) and such modifications probably cannot be detected when focusing on such a short observation period only. Further examination of ciliary motility with a phase-contrast electronic microscope could provide more information about the pathogenesis of these symptoms.

留言 (0)

沒有登入
gif