Figures
- FIGURE 1
Distribution of the study subpopulations.
- FIGURE 2
Textual analysis of the respondents’ answers to the question “when you think about difficulties caused by wearing a face mask, which three words come to mind?”. Following lemmatisation of the verbatim responses, correspondence factorial analysis and descendent hierarchical classification identified three semantic classes. Class 1 had a dominant “respiratory” connotation, class 2 had a dominant “bothering” connotation and class 3 had a “positive” connotation (words with a respiratory connotation appear in bold). Class 1 and class 2 were significantly associated with reporting face mask-related dyspnoea at rest (Chi-squared test), whereas class 3 was significantly associated with not reporting face mask-related dyspnoea at rest (Chi-squared test).
- FIGURE 3
Frequency of mask-related dyspnoea. a) Comparison of respiratory healthy and respiratory disease populations (answer no or yes, respectively, to “treated for chronic respiratory disease or congestive heart failure” question). b) Comparison of respiratory healthy (RH)-family+ and RH-family− populations (answer no or yes, respectively, to “close relatives treated for chronic respiratory disease or congestive heart failure” question). Note that during intense effort, 55.5% of the respondents reported never wearing a mask; among the 44.5% who wore a mask during intense effort, 59.0% reported mask-related dyspnoea. Horizontal bars represent the mean value in the whole study sample. *: p<0.05; **: p<0.01; ***: p<0.001.
- FIGURE 4
Variables independently associated with reporting a) mask-related dyspnoea at rest or during moderate effort, and dyspnoea intensity b) at rest or c) during moderate effort, according to multivariate analysis. a) Relative being treated for respiratory disease p=0.008, facial mask as protection for others p=0.002, removing face mask p<0.001; b) best sensory descriptor p<0.001; c) age p=0.041, smoking p=0.041, removing face mask p<0.001, best sensory descriptor p<0.001, best affective descriptor p=0.044.
Tables
- TABLE 1
Description of the global study population and of the “respiratory healthy” and “respiratory disease” subgroups
Whole population Respiratory healthy group# Respiratory disease group¶ p-value+ Participants 1012 860 (85) 152 (15) Female 517 (51.1) 457 (53.1) 60 (39.5) 0.012 Age years 50.00 (34.00–65.00) 49.00 (33.00–62.00) 57.50 (44.00–71.00) <0.001 Socio-professional status 0.014 Farm workers 7 (0.7) 5 (0.6) 2 (1.3) Artisans or shopkeepers 33 (3.3) 31 (3.6) 2 (1.3) Senior management 108 (10.7) 95 (11.0) 13 (8.6) Middle management 158 (15.6) 141 (16.4) 17 (11.2) Employees 173 (17.1) 157 (18.3) 16 (10.5) Labourers 134 (13.2) 114 (13.3) 20 (13.2) Retired or not in work 399 (39.4) 317 (36.9) 82 (53.9) Education 0.877 Living area§ 0.187 Tobacco consumption 0.006 Active 199 (19.7) 170 (19.8) 29 (19.1) Past 293 (29.0) 225 (26.2) 68 (44.7) Never 520 (51.4) 465 (54.1) 55 (36.2) Treated for chronic respiratory disease or congestive heart failure Asthma 58 (5.7) 58 (38.2) COPD 24 (2.4) 24 (15.8) Heart failure 36 (3.6) 36 (23.7) Other 57 (5.6) 57 (37.5) Close family member treated for chronic respiratory disease or congestive heart failure 0.330 Overall 135 (13.3) 120 (14.0) 15 (9.9) Asthma 62 (45.9) 54 (45.0) 8 (53.3) COPD 15 (11.1) 14 (11.7) 1 (6.7) Heart failure 35 (25.9) 30 (25.0) 5 (33.3) Other 40 (29.6) 4 (26.7) 36 (30.0) Breathing-oriented activityƒ 0.002 Often or from time to time 316 (31.2) 247 (28.7) 69 (45.4) Rarely or never 696 (68.8) 613 (71.3) 83 (54.6) Data are presented as n, n (%) or median (interquartile range), unless otherwise stated. Bold type represents statistical significance. #: answered “no” to “treated for chronic respiratory disease or congestive heart failure”; ¶: answered “yes” to “treated for chronic respiratory disease or congestive heart failure”: asthma n=38 (5.7% of the overall population), COPD n=25 (3.75% of the overall population), heart failure n=16 (2.4% of the overall population), n=1 mentioned cystic fibrosis (0.15%); +: corrected for multiple comparisons (n=69); §: three categories: urban, Paris area; urban, outside Paris area; rural; ƒ: details are given in supplementary table S1.
- TABLE 2
Dyspnoea ratings according to circumstances and respondent categories (for a better apprehension of the differences, the corresponding distributions are provided in supplementary figure S1)
Whole population Respiratory healthy group# Respiratory disease group¶ p-value+ Respiratory healthy group RH-family− § RH-family+ ƒ p-value+ Subjects 1012 860 (85) 152 (15) 846¶¶ 726 (86) 120 (14) Dyspnoea rating at rest 7.00 (2.00–10.00) 7.00 (2.00–10.00) 8.00 (2.00–10.00) 0.035 7.00 (2.00–10.00) 7.00 (2.00–10.00) 7.50 (3.00–10.00) 0.285 Dyspnoea rating during moderate exertion 7.00 (1.00–10.00) 7.00 (1.00–10.00) 8.00 (2.00–10.00) 0.020 7.00 (1.00–10.00) 7.00 (1.00–10.00) 7.50 (3.00–10.00) 0.111 Dyspnoea rating during sport## 8.00 (1.00–10.00) 8.00 (1.00–10.00) 8.00 (5.00–10.00) 0.481 8.00 (1.00–10.00) 8.00 (1.00–10.00) 9.00 (3.00–10.00) 0.054 Data are presented as n, n (%) or median (range), unless otherwise stated. Bold type represents statistical significance. #: answered “no” to “treated for chronic respiratory disease or congestive heart failure”; ¶: answered “yes” to “treated for chronic respiratory disease or congestive heart failure”; +: corrected for multiple comparisons (n=69); §: answered “no” to “close family members treated for chronic respiratory disease or congestive heart failure”; ƒ: answered “yes” to “close family members treated for chronic respiratory disease or congestive heart failure”; ##: n=553 declared never wearing a face mask during this type of activity; ¶¶: n=14 declared never wearing a mask.
Supplementary Material
Please note: supplementary material is not edited by the Editorial Office, and is uploaded as it has been supplied by the author.
Supplementary material ERJ-01459-2021.SUPPLEMENT
Supplementary Material
This one-page PDF can be shared freely online.
Shareable PDF ERJ-01459-2021.Shareable
