Estimating the Effect and Cost-Effectiveness of Facemasks in Reducing the Spread of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in Uganda

  1. Betty K Nannyonga
  2. Rhoda K Wanyenze
  3. Pontiano Kaleebu
  4. John M Ssenkusu
  5. Tom Lutalo
  6. Fredrick Edward Makumbi
  7. Arthur Kwizera
  8. Pauline Byakika
  9. Willford Kirungi
  10. Henry Kyobe Bosa
  11. Vincent A Ssembatya
  12. Henry Mwebesa
  13. Diana Atwine
  14. Jane Ruth Aceng
  15. Yonas Tegegn Woldermariam
  16. all members of the Uganda SARS-COV-2 Scientific Advisory Committee

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Evidence that face masks provide effective protection against respiratory infections in the community is scarce. However, face masks are widely used by health workers as part of droplet precautions when caring for patients with respiratory infections. It would therefore be reasonable to suggest that consistent widespread use of face masks in the community could prevent further spread of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this study we examine public face mask wearing in Uganda where a proportion wears masks to protect against acquiring, and the other to prevent from transmitting SARS-CoV-2. The objective of this study was to determine what percentage of the population would have to wear face masks to reduce susceptibility to and infectivity of SARS-COV-2 in Uganda, keeping the basic reproduction number below unity and/or flattening the curve. We used an SEIAQRD model for the analysis. Results show that implementation of facemasks has a relatively large impact on the size of the coronavirus epidemic in Uganda. We find that the critical mask adherence is 5 per 100 when 80% wear face masks. A cost-effective analysis shows that utilizing funds to provide 1 public mask to the population has a per capita compounded cost of USD 1.34. If provision of face masks is done simultaneously with supportive care, the per capita compounded cost is USD 1.965, while for the case of only treatment and no provision of face masks costs each Ugandan USD 4.0579. We conclude that since it is hard to achieve a 100% adherence to face masks, government might consider provision of face masks in conjunction with provision of care.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.11.20128272: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: Please consider improving the rainbow (“jet”) colormap(s) used on page 7. At least one figure is not accessible to readers with colorblindness and/or is not true to the data, i.e. not perceptually uniform.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.06.11.20128272v1 on medRxiv