The Adverse and Advantage Effects of Wearing a Facemask in Thai Children: A Survey During the COVID-19 Pandemic

• Published in: Journal of primary care & community health Vol. 13; p. 21501319221131704
• Main Authors: Ratchatavech, Kritchawan, Techasatian, Leelawadee, Panombualert, Sunee, Uppala, Rattapon
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 2022; SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC; SAGE Publishing
• Subjects: Adverse; Age; Caregivers; Children; Coronaviruses; COVID-19; Diarrhea; Discomfort; Hospitalization; Masking; Masks; Pandemics; Pediatrics; Polls & surveys; Population; Respiratory diseases; Side effects; COVID-19; adverse effect; children; facemask
• DOI: 10.1177/21501319221131704
• EISSN: 2150-1327
• ISSN: 2150-1319

Background:
There is little information on facemask use during the COVID-19 pandemic in the pediatric population. This became the main purpose of the present study to investigate demographic data of facemask wearing in children, types, and length of facemask, as well as the benefits, drawbacks, and negative consequences of facemask wearing in this population.
Methods:
A cross-sectional study was conducted using a structured questionnaire sent via Google Forms. Caregivers for consecutive convenience were asked in the survey (parents of children under the age of 18).
Results:
A total number of 706 children were enrolled. There were 320 boys (45.33%), and 386 girls (54.67%). The children’s ages range between 4 months and 18 years, with a median age of 9 years. A surgical mask (549, 77.76%) was the most frequent type of facemask in the study population, followed by a cloth mask (86, 12.18%). Facemasks have been shown to be beneficial in the pediatric population. When compared to a former time when facemasks were not used routinely, there were considerably fewer respiratory infections, reduced diarrhea symptoms, and a drop in hospital admissions. In 317 cases (44.9%), children were shown to have negative consequences from wearing facemasks. The most prevalent adverse effect observed in the study population was non-cutaneous (respiratory discomfort/breathing difficulty) which were found in 240 cases (33.99%). Double masking method (surgical + surgical) and wearing a facemask oversize revealed a higher risk in the presence of facemask adverse effects, whereas wearing a proper size facemask reduces the risk of adverse effects from facemask use in children (Adjusted OR [95% CI] = 0.55 [0.38-0.78], P .0003).
Conclusions:
Wearing a proper-size facemask reduces the risk of adverse effects from facemask use in children. The future suggestion of an appropriate facemask size for a certain age will aid in the avoidance of facemask adverse effects in the pediatric population.