New3 PDF
New3 PDF
New3 PDF
The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not peer-reviewed)
is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
bjavid@gmail.com
nathalie.balaban@mail.huji.ac.il
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.13.20063529. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not peer-reviewed)
is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
transmission routes and dynamics are unknown, SARS-CoV2 is thought primarily to spread via
contagious respiratory droplets1. Unlike with SARS-CoV, maximal viral shedding occurs in the early
phase of illness1, and this is supported by models that suggest 40-80% of transmission events occur
from pre- and asymptomatic individuals2,3. One widely-discussed strategy to limit transmission of
masks. Modelling for pandemic influenza suggests some benefit in reducing total numbers infected
with even 50% mask-use4. COVID-19 has a higher hospitalization and mortality rate than influenza5 ,
and the impacts on these parameters, and critically, at what point in the pandemic trajectory mask-use
We derived a simplified SIR model to investigate the effects of near-universal mask-use on COVID-
19 assuming 8 or 16% mask efficacy (Supplementary information for relevant parameters and
patients and cumulative mortality, since these are parameters that are likely to have the most severe
consequences in the COVID-19 pandemic. Whereas mask use had a relatively minor benefit on
critical-care and mortality rates when transmissibility (Reff) was high (Fig. 1a), the reduction on deaths
was dramatic as the effective R approached 1 (Fig. 1b), as might be expected after aggressive social-
distancing measures such as wide-spread lockdowns5. One major concern with COVID-19 is its
potential to overwhelm healthcare infrastructures, even in resource-rich settings, with one third of
hospitalized patients requiring critical-care. We incorporated this into our model, increasing death
rates for when critical-care resources have been exhausted (Fig. 1c). Our simple model shows that
modest efficacy of masks could avert substantial mortality in this scenario. Importantly, the effects on
mortality became hyper-sensitive to mask-wearing as the effective R approaches 1, i.e. near the
tipping point of when the infection trajectory is expected to revert to exponential growth, as would be
In order to understand the generality of the effect of mask wearing upon home confinement removal,
we also analysed the potential effects of mask-wearing for data provided by a more comprehensive
and realistic model of the COVID-19 infection, which included modelling of different levels of social-
distancing measures on infection and likely deaths5. When home-confinement is lifted but other
social-distancing measures are in place, such as school closure and case isolation, wearing masks can
maintain the benefits of home-confinement, both in terms of deaths (Fig. 1d) and critical-care bed use
(Fig. 1e).
Limitations of our study include the relatively straightforward model we employed, as well as
assumptions of high compliance with mask-wearing and their potential efficacy, for which definitive
evidence in pandemics is lacking6. Despite these limitations, our model suggests that mask-wearing
might exert maximal benefit as nations plan their ‘post-lockdown’ strategies and suggests that mask-
wearing should be included in further more sophisticated models of the current pandemic. Since
otherwise similar countries are currently devising different mask-wearing scenarios, the current
References
Figure 1. Mask effectiveness on mortality varies by Reff (A) Number of critically ill patients (red)
and total deaths (black) for an epidemic spreading with R0 of 2.2 (see Supplementary information for
parameters) in a simple SIR model, x-axis represents time in days. The different curves are computed
for a reduction of infectivity of 0, 8 and 16%. (B) Same as A, but for an epidemic spreading with R0
of 1.3. Note that the reduction in infectivity by mask wearing has a larger effect. (C) Same as B but
taking into account increase in death when beds are unavailable for critically-ill patients. (D-E)
Analysis of the data of Ferguson et al (ref 5, Table 4). Assuming a 10% reduction in infectivity, mask
wearing may be at least as effective as home confinement at reducing deaths (D) or preventing
overwhelming icu beds (E). The different bars (1-5) are different thresholds (“triggers”) for