key: cord-0893643-w74ke5ll authors: Narla, Shanthi; Watchmaker, Jacqueline; Ozog, David M.; Rohrer, Thomas E. title: Cosmetic Practices in the COVID-19 Era date: 2021-02-08 journal: nan DOI: 10.1016/j.yacs.2021.01.004 sha: da756d00a1fb9c2501cb9e9495c6eb22c394509d doc_id: 893643 cord_uid: w74ke5ll nan T he COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically changed the medical aesthetic practice. From impacting patient volume, to altering cosmetic trends, to necessitating reconfiguration of office protocols to promote social distancing, COVID-19 has unquestionably affected the day-to-day experience for both providers and patients. Although some of these changes are likely transient, others may develop into long-term trends. This article discusses pertinent studies on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission, shares some helpful tips for managing a cosmetic practice during COVID-19, and gives an overview of some of the current trends and guidelines that have emerged during the pandemic. Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19, is primarily transmitted through respiratory droplets and aerosols (fine solid particles or liquid droplets suspended in air or another gas); however, other routes of transmission, including body fluid routes, and fecal-oral transmission, may rarely occur [1, 2] . High viral loads of SARS-CoV-2 have been detected in oral fluids of both symptomatic and asymptomatic COVID-19-positive patients [3, 4] , and speech and other vocal activities, such as singing, have been shown to generate aerosolized viral particles. The rate of emission of viral particles typically corresponds with voice loudness, but a small fraction of individuals behave as "speech superemitters," who consistently release an order of magnitude more particles than their peers because of higher levels of surfactant in their lungs [5] . Normal speaking produces thousands of oral fluid droplets with a broad distribution of size (1 mm to 500 mm). Whereas large droplets fall quickly to the ground, small droplets can dehydrate and linger as droplet nuclei ( 5 mm in diameter) in the air, where they behave like an aerosol and expand the spatial extent of emitted infectious particles [6] . These smaller aerosolized particles are of particular concern because they can remain airborne indefinitely under most indoor conditions unless they are removed by air 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 currents or dilution ventilation. These small, aerosolized particles can also be inhaled into the lowerrespiratory tract [7, 8] . When aerosolized particles are inhaled, the virus is introduced to the host. Although there are no hard data showing exactly how many SARS-CoV-2 viral particles are needed for someone to become infected with COVID-19, some have estimated it to be as low as 1000 particles. Theoretically, the risk of becoming infected is therefore a combination of amount of virus someone is exposed to and the time of that exposure. This combination would obviously vary significantly from individual to individual. It is estimated that simple breathing releases roughly 20 viral particles a minute into the environment, so it would take roughly 50 minutes of an unprotected encounter with an infected individual in an enclosed space to reach the 1000 viral particles to become infected. If someone is speaking, the number of viral particles released increases roughly 10-fold to about 200 particles per minute. That would decrease the threshold exposure time down to about 5 minutes in the same environment. If an infected individual is shouting or singing, the release of viral particles is even greater, and a cough or sneeze can release upwards of 200,000 viral particles instantly [9] . It has also been shown that greater viral loads are associated with lower survival probabilities [10, 11] . Given these findings, this transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2 is especially high when people converse in enclosed spaces with poor ventilation for extended periods of time [12] . One way to decrease this risk during patient encounters is to limit speaking between patient and providers especially during facial procedures that require the removal of patient masks [13] . Other ways to decrease transmission, such as proper mask wearing and ventilation, are discussed later. There has been a significant amount of misinformation regarding masks and respirators throughout the pandemic, which is most likely due to a lack of understanding regarding the engineering of these products. The filtering capacity of masks, respirators, and respirator cartridges is denoted by a letter and numeric value. Filters are marked as either N, R, or P. The filters marked N are not resistant to oil; R are somewhat resistant to oil, and P are strongly resistant to oil. The number associated with each filter denotes its filtering capacity for particles 0.3 mm in size. Hence, respirators with N95 filtering capacity are nonresistant to oil and can filter out 95% of 0.3-mm particles [14] . SARS-CoV-2 is an enveloped virus with an approximate diameter of 0.1 mm. Although this is smaller than 0.3 mm, previous studies showed N95 respirators can filter w99.8% of viral particles with a diameter of 0.1 mm [15] . The reason N95 respirators can successfully filter these smaller viral particles is 2-fold. First, viral particles, such as SARS-CoV-2, are often produced bonded with biological materials, such as water or mucus; this larger bonded particle is easily filtered by an N95 respirator. Second, in addition to acting as a net that filters out particles greater than 0.3 mm, N95 respirator fibers can trap very small particles via electrostatic attraction [16] . The trapping of small molecules is facilitated by the random motion patterns that such small particles exhibit (Brownian motion) [17] . It is important to note that reuse of N95 respirators can lead to the dissipation of these electrostatic charges, hence reducing the filtering capacity of the respirators with prolonged use. Although N95 respirators are the ideal face covering for both self-protection and protecting close contacts, cloth and surgical masks can also be effective in decreasing transmission. Although cloth and surgical masks are primarily protective against droplet particles (>5 mm), evidence suggests they may reduce viral aerosol shedding and thus help with source control [18, 19] . Generally available household materials have a filtration rate between 49% and 86% for exhaled particles 0.02 mm in size, whereas surgical masks have a filtration rate between 75% and 89% for the same sized particles [20, 21] . Using laser-light scattering, a recent study demonstrated that virtually no droplets were "expelled" with a homemade mask consisting of a washcloth attached with 2 rubber bands around the head. The same study demonstrated significant viral levels were expelled without a mask [22] . It was estimated that if at least 60% of the population wore masks that were 60% effective in blocking viral transmission (eg, a well-fitting, 2-layer cotton mask), the epidemic could be significantly mitigated [23, 24] . Therefore, both patients and providers should at a very minimum wear a surgical mask or a cloth mask at all times. Given patients may arrive with poorly sealed masks or homemade masks with variable filtering capacities, it may be ideal to provide patients with new surgical masks before check-in to wear during their appointment. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently posted guidelines stressing the importance of improving ventilation in office buildings. The recommendations included the following: (1) increasing the percentage of outdoor air (eg, using economizer modes of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning operations) potentially as high as 100%; (2) considering using natural ventilation (eg, opening windows if possible and safe to do) to increase outdoor air dilution; (3) increasing air filtration to high as possible (minimum efficiency reporting value 13 or 14); and (4) considering using portable high-efficiency particulate air [HEPA] fan/filtration systems to enhance air cleaning, especially in higher-risk areas [25, 26] . A low-cost air purifier with a HEPA system Q9 costs approximately $100, can circulate air in a 155-square-foot room 5 times per hour, and can be easily widely deployed though clinic spaces [27] . The importance of natural ventilation is exemplified by a recent investigation of SARS-CoV-2 transmission among bus riders in Eastern China in January 2020. This cohort study examined a community of 128 lay Buddhists from the Zhejiang province who took 2 buses (60 on bus 1 and 68 on bus 2) on a 100-minute trip to attend a 150-minute worship event. The source patient was a passenger on bus 2. In both buses, central air conditioners were in indoor recirculation mode. Not surprisingly, 24 of the 68 individuals on bus 2 were later diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection, whereas none of the 60 individuals in bus 1 were infected. Passengers sitting closer to the index case did not have a statistically significant higher risk of COVID-19 than those sitting farther away. However, all passengers sitting close to a window remained healthy, with the exception of the passenger sitting next to the index case [28] . Recirculation of indoor air is not thought to be sufficient to decrease transmission, as demonstrated by an outbreak at a training workshop in Hangzhou city, Zhejiang province. Thirty attendees from different cities attended the workshop, which consisted of four 4-hour group sessions in 2 closed rooms of 49 m 2 and 75 m 2 . An automatic timer on the central air conditioners circulated the air in each room for 10 minutes every 4 hours using "an indoor recirculating mode." Although none of the workshop participants were symptomatic during the workshop, 15 of them were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection shortly after the conclusion of the workshop [29] . During the COVID-19 pandemic, UV-C has gained significant popularity as a method of disinfection against SARS-CoV-2. Briefly, UV-C (254 nm) photons are absorbed by microbial nucleic acids, leading to the formation of cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers and the release of reactive oxygen species, which damage the microbial DNA, preventing replication and inactivating the microorganism [30] . Nardell and Nathavitharana [31] made the argument that upper-room disinfection by UV-C coupled with adequate ventilation can significantly reduce the risk of contracting COVID-19. In line with this, the CDC stated in their recent guidelines that UV germicidal irradiation (UVGI) could be considered a supplement to help inactivate the virus [25] . When used correctly, UVGI can be performed without an increase in the incidence of UV-C overexposure side effects, such as eye and skin irritation [32] [33] [34] [35] . In addition to being used in public and high-traffic areas, upper-room UVGI may be used to reduce risk of viral plume during certain laser procedures. The fixtures are typically mounted at least 7 feet above the ground, with at least 1 foot of space above the fixture for decontamination to occur. Upper-room UVGI is typically recommended when ventilation rates are low, because when ventilation rates are greater than 6 air changes per hour, it may be less effective in comparison to particle removal by ventilation because particles may have less residence exposure time to UV-C [35] . Screening measures and protocols will continue to evolve as community prevalence of COVID-19 changes. Screening has become ubiquitous in the pandemic era ( Fig. 1 provides an example of a screening protocol), and although current screening methods are able to detect symptomatic and high-risk individuals, it still remains an imperfect barrier to spread [36] . Mathematical models have demonstrated that screening misses approximately half of the infections in a growing pandemic because of the high percentage of newly exposed asymptomatic patients still in the incubation period. In addition, the sensitivity of thermal scanners [37] and lack of truthful self-reporting on screening questionnaires can decrease the ability of screening protocols to detect cases [38] . Despite these faults, screening questionnaires and noncontact thermal scanners ( Fig. 2) can detect a proportion of active infections, and as the pandemic decelerates and there are less newly exposed individuals, screening should become more sensitive. Therefore, especially in the cosmetic setting whereby procedures are elective, practices should err on the side of caution and continue with rigorous screening protocols in parallel with additional safety measures for the foreseeable future. Cosmetic Practices in the COVID-19 Era 3 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 Regarding staff screening, the Aesthetic Society COVID-19 Safety Task Force [39] recommends all staff members have their temperatures taken and recorded at the start of the day. A short questionnaire should also be administered to staff daily requiring selfattestation that they are asymptomatic and unaware of any sick contacts [40] . Staff should be reminded frequently that sick-leave policies are flexible and to not report to work if they even think they may be symptomatic. Although in the past some offices may have set up a culture in which it was acceptable to work through a cold, today this cannot happen, and all efforts must be made to encourage staff to stay at home if they have even the slightest symptoms. Scheduling templates should be adjusted to minimize appointment lengths. Although the exact duration of exposure needed for transmission is unknown, brief interactions (<15 minutes) are less likely to result in transmission [41] , and thus, appointment times should be scheduled for 10 minutes or less. Shortened appointment times should be discussed at the time of booking to help manage expectations and minimize dissatisfaction. Patients should be encouraged to visit the clinic alone to avoid crowding in examination rooms [42] . Utilization of televisits for cosmetic consults followed by a short in-person appointment to proceed with the treatment plan can help minimize provider-patient interaction times and may be useful even in the postpandemic cosmetic practice. In addition, scheduling templates should be adjusted to prolong the time in between patient visits. Longer periods of time between patient visits help to minimize the number of patients in an office at a given time and provides staff with sufficient time to clean testing for acute infection when available. This should be scheduled at the time of patient booking. b Screening questionnaires should be tailored to current CDC guidelines and should focus on symptoms, travel history, and recent sick contacts. c Ideally, in-person screening stations should be set up outside the clinic or in a contained area designated for screening to minimize interactions before clearance. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 the clinic rooms between patients. Although fomite transmission is not thought to be the main way SARS-CoV-2 spreads [43] , an elevated level of cleaning and sanitization between patients should continue until further definitive data are acquired. The use of waiting rooms should be minimized in the era of COVID-19. This can be accomplished through implementation of new patient arrival protocols and through physical reconfiguration of waiting rooms (Figs. 3 and 4) . Chairs should be spaced at least 6 feet apart, and touch points, such as reading materials, sample stations, and food/drink, should be removed [39, 40] . Placing large stickers on floors spaced 6 feet apart can serve as a gentle reminder to patients to socially distance at check-in and checkout areas. Patients should be instructed not to arrive more than 5 or 10 minutes before their appointments. Other measures, such as having the patient wait in their vehicle until a staff member is ready to receive and room them, can also be implemented. Online patient portals and e-communication for registration and paperwork should be used to minimize patient contact. Furthermore, plastic/acrylic windows panels or glass partitions, especially in waiting rooms, should be used whenever possible to decrease staff and health care personnel (HCP) exposure [44] . With time, a slow transition to normalcy may be possible, but this transition should be gradual given the high-risk nature of waiting rooms (multiple 5 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 potentially sick patients congregating in a small space with multiple touch points). Furthermore, consent forms for treatment may need to be modified to clearly state that there may be increased risks of acquiring SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 in close proximity to doctors, nurses, or other patients, and that the patients understand these risks in relation to seeking any type of medical care in the COVID-19 era. The CDC recommends maintaining at least 6 feet of distance from others [45] , and although unfeasible for practitioners and patients during cosmetic treatments, this rule should be implemented at all other times during a patient visit, including during checkin, during checkout, and in the elevators (Fig. 5) . A systematic review and meta-analysis (that included data for SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and Middle East respiratory syndrome [MERS Q10 ]) found that transmission of viruses was lower with physical distancing of 1 m or more, compared with a distance of less than 1 m (n 5 10,736, pooled adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09 to 0.38; risk difference [RD] À10.2%, 95% CI À11.5 to À7.5; moderate certainty); protection was increased as distance was lengthened (change in relative risk [RR] 2.02 per meter; p interaction 5 0$041; moderate certainty) [19] . There are currently no studies showing a beneficial effect of using larger examination rooms during patient encounters. However, use of larger rooms could be considered, if available, to help promote social distancing during portions of the patient visit that do Narla et al 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 not require close contact between the provider and the patient, such as initial history taking and patient education. What Is Classified as "an Exposure"? Per CDC guidelines, an exposure in the health care setting is classified as an HCP who has prolonged a (!15 minutes) close contact (<6 feet) with a COVID-19-positive person (either laboratory confirmed or clinically compatible) from 2 days before symptom onset until the infected person meets criteria for discontinuing home isolation [46] . There are no set guidelines for postexposure testing in the health care setting. The CDC recommends considering testing an exposed, unprotected HCP using authorized nucleic acid or antigen detection assays if testing is readily available and result turnaround time is less than 24 hours [47] . However, the CDC recommends caution with using postexposure testing to allow an unprotected exposed HCP to return to work before 14 days given the potential for false negative results early in the disease Pa ent calls or texts clinic upon arrival but prior to entering clinic (pa ent can wait in car or outdoors) Staff receives no fica on pa ent has arrived. When the provider is ready to see the pa ent, a staff member contacts pa ent Cosmetic Practices in the COVID-19 Era 7 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 course; if testing is pursued and the initial test is negative, repeat testing should be considered (Fig. 6) . If an HCP develops even mild symptoms consistent with COVID-19, they must cease patient care, notify their supervisor, leave work immediately, and selfisolate. These individuals should be prioritized for testing and should not return to work until they meet criteria for discontinuing home isolation [46] (see Fig. 6 for additional guidance). Kapoor and colleagues [42] classified various aesthetic procedures as low risk, moderate risk, and high risk based on the likelihood of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from the patient to the treating HCP during the procedure. The risk stratification was based on the type of procedure being performed (aerosol-generating procedure [AGP] vs non-aerosol-generating procedure), body part on which the procedure is being performed (face/ body), and the duration of the procedure. Additional considerations included contact with mucosa/saliva, body secretions during the procedure, and the ability of the patient to remain masked. Low-risk aesthetic procedures included injectables for the upper third of the face and extrafacial sites, injection lipolysis on 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 extrafacial sites, cryolipolysis on the body, nonablative fractional resurfacing lasers for extrafacial sites, highintensity focused ultrasound for extrafacial parts, radiofrequency tightening (RF) for extrafacial areas, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) therapy for scalp or body areas, laser hair removal (LHR) of upper face and body areas with contact cooling device, low-level light therapy, chemical peels, body treatments with electronic muscle stimulator, intravenous injection therapy, sclerotherapy, and hydrafacial [42] . Moderate-risk aesthetic procedures included microneedling procedures (with or without RF) on the face and extrafacial sites, thread lifting on the face and extrafacial sites, invasive RF devices for face and extrafacial sites, soft tissue fillers in the lips, soft tissue fillers/PRP in the genital areas, and RF/lasers for genital area [42] . High-risk procedures included AGPs or plumeproducing procedures, such as Q-switched Nd:YAG, alexandrite, ruby lasers, pulse-dye laser, ablative resurfacing lasers (fractional and nonfractional), LHR with noncontact cooling devices (generating plume), electrofulguration, electrocautery, microdermabrasion, jet infusions/facials, DermaJet devices, micropigmentation, microblading, and body treatments with plasma devices [42] . For all tiers, at the very minimum, disposable gloves and surgical masks should be worn. Although direct evidence is minimal, eye protection at all times is also recommended. During high-risk procedures, face shields should be used, and finally, during moderate-to highrisk procedures, an N95 respirator should be worn underneath a surgical mask [42] . See additional considerations based on body location and procedure in later discussion. Given procedures on the head and neck may be associated with increased risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 compared with procedures below the clavicle [48] , additional protective measures should be considered, such as the following: (1) elevating PPE to include N95 respirators and face shields [39, 48] ; (2) not having the patient speak while their mask is off to minimize risk of airborne transmission [6] ; (3) 10 minutes); and (4) using larger rooms given the size of a procedure room may influence risk of contracting COVID-19 [48] . The conjunctiva of the eye is easily exposed to infectious droplets and fomites during close contact with infected individuals and contaminated hands. A recent systematic review and meta-analysis (that included data for SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS) found that eye protection was associated with lower infection (n 5 3713; aOR 0.22, 95% CI 0.12-0$39, RD À10.6%, 95% CI À12.5 to À7.7; low certainty) [19] . Some respiratory viruses, such as human adenovirus and avian influenza virus (H7), frequently cause highly infectious conjunctivitis or keratoconjunctivitis. Hence, the conjunctiva is proposed to be an important portal of entry for respiratory viruses, and tear and conjunctival secretions may contain virus and spread viral infection [49, 50] . Therefore, when working close to the face of a patient, wearing protective eyewear should be implemented. Body-contouring procedures on the trunk and extremities, such as cryolipolysis, RF, and electromagnetic energy treatments, have the advantages of limited need for face-to-face contact between the provider and the patient, and no need for the patient to remove their mask during treatment. These procedures however often require lengthy appointments, so limited inroom contact with the patient once the treatment has begun and strict enforcement of mask wearing throughout the entire procedure (even when alone in a treatment room) will help reduce transmission risk. Procedures such as neurotoxin and dermal filler injections create exposure risk because of the close contact required between the provider and the patient, and the potential need for patient mask removal [40] . Injectable procedures involving the oral cavity or nose, such as central face filler, may be classified as AGPs, and appropriate elevation of PPE as described above should be used [51] . Although neurotoxin injections can typically be performed in less than 10 minutes, filler treatments to multiple areas may take longer, and a staged approach should be considered. Having the patient rinse their mouth with 0.5% hydrogen peroxide or 1% povidone-iodine immediately before procedures such as lip injections with soft tissue fillers may be considered [42, 52] . Caution should also be used during laser-and energybased treatments because in addition to close contact and frequent need for patient mask removal, laserand light-based devices can be classified as nonrespiratory AGPs owing to plumes containing aerosolized particles of blood and skin [53] . It has been demonstrated that thermal disruption of viable human cells results in the release of carbon particles, virus, bacteria, DNA Q12 , and toxic gases in all surgical plume with the exception of lower-powered lasers [54] . Although very uncommon, especially in asymptomatic patients, SARS-CoV-2 has been identified in both blood and skin of infected individuals [55, 56] ; although no studies have directly looked at SARS-CoV-2 transmission in relation to laser treatments, there is a theoretic risk. Use of plume evacuation systems with filters that remove particulates as small as 0.1 mm, known as an ultralow particular air filter, may be considered [57] . It is uncertain if forced air-cooling increases risk of contracting COVID-19. During January 26 to February 10, 2020, an outbreak of 2019 novel coronavirus disease in an air-conditioned restaurant in Guangzhou, China involved 3 family clusters. Virus transmission in this outbreak could not be explained by droplet transmission alone. However, strong airflow from the air conditioner could have propagated droplets from table C to table A, then to table B, and then back to table C . Thus, the airflow direction prompted by the airconditioned ventilation was consistent with droplet transmission [58] . Therefore, given the positive pressure nature of forced air-cooling devices, alternative pain control techniques during laser-and light-based treatments should be used [40, 48] . Clinics should ensure protocols for adequate sanitization of laser tips, handpieces, and goggles between patients. For LHR, patients should be asked to shave at home before coming to the procedure to reduce contact time with staff [42] . Similar to laser-and light-based devices, plumes can be generated by electrosurgical procedures. Electrosurgery may be classified as nonrespiratory AGPs, and necessary precautions should be taken [59] . Although these procedures may be performed outside a physician's office, they still necessitate adequate PPE given they are often performed in the perioral region and require prolonged patient contact time. During the height of the pandemic, many elective procedures were postponed, and some aesthetic-based practices were temporarily closed. Consequently, it is no surprise that the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) anticipates a decrease in total number of cosmetic procedures in 2020 because of COVID-19. In addition to a decrease in number of procedures performed, patient interest waned as demonstrated by a recent analysis of Google Trends, which showed a decrease in online searches for cosmetic procedures, such as "lip fillers" and "Botox," during March and April 2020. More recently, however, these searches have begun to increase and are now nearing pre-COVID-19 levels [60] . In addition, a recent national survey of more than 1000 people conducted by the ASPS showed that despite the COVID-19 pandemic, 49% of those who have not had plastic surgery previously would be open to cosmetic or reconstructive treatment in the future [61] . In the COVID-19 era, there appears to be a growing trend toward more minimally invasive cosmetic procedures that allow for minimal contact time and follow-up in health care facilities. According to the ASPS, of the most-requested treatments during telemedicine appointments, 65% were for botulinum toxin type A fillers (eg, Botox, Dysport, and Xeomin), and 37% were for soft tissue fillers (eg, Juvéderm, Radiesse, Restylane, Sculptra, and Belotero). Lip injections were still popular despite mandates for mask wearing in public [62] , which may be explained by less patient concern with postprocedure erythema and bruising given mask wearing and cancellation of many social gatherings. In addition, the authors have anecdotally noticed an increasing number of patients who seek cosmetic intervention to improve their appearance on Zoom. This concern is reflected by Zoom's "Touch Up My Appearance" feature on its video conferencing service, which allows users to create "a softening effect to skin to minimize the visibility of imperfections" [62] . Cosmetic clinical protocols, guidelines, and trends will undoubtedly continue to evolve based on COVID-19 community prevalence, transmission rates, and emerging scientific evidence. Although even stringent office protocols and safety measures are imperfect, erring on the side of caution and staying up-to-date with federal, state, and local health authority regulations regarding elective medical procedures can increase safety for both aesthetic patients and providers. Patients, providers, and staff should wear a surgical or cloth mask at all times. Limit speaking between patient and providers particularly during facial procedures that require the removal of patient masks. The use of waiting rooms should be minimized in the era of COVID-19. Scheduling templates should be adjusted to minimize appointment lengths. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently posted guidelines stressing the importance of improving ventilation in office buildings. All efforts must be made to encourage staff to stay at home if they have even the slightest symptoms. During moderate-to high-risk procedures, an N95 respirator should be worn underneath a surgical mask. During high-risk procedures, face shields should also be used. Especially in the cosmetic setting, where procedures are elective, practices should err on the side of caution and continue with rigorous screening protocols in parallel with additional safety measures for the foreseeable future. Cosmetic Practices in the COVID-19 Era 11 041 042 043 044 045 046 047 048 049 050 051 052 053 054 055 056 057 058 059 060 061 062 063 064 065 066 067 068 069 070 071 072 073 074 075 076 077 078 079 080 081 082 083 084 085 086 087 088 089 090 091 092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 Expert recommendations for tracheal intubation in critically ill patients with noval coronavirus disease 2019 Airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2: the world should face the reality Improved molecular diagnosis of COVID-19 by the novel, highly sensitive and specific COVID-19-RdRp/Hel real-time reverse transcription-PCR assay validated in vitro and with clinical specimens Virological assessment of hospitalized patients with COVID-2019 Aerosol emission and superemission during human speech increase with voice loudness Visualizing speech-generated oral fluid droplets with laser light scattering Frequently asked questions about biosafety and COVID-19 2020 Particle sizes of infectious aerosols: implications for infection control The Risks -Know Them -Avoid Them Temporal profiles of viral load in posterior oropharyngeal saliva samples and serum antibody responses during infection by SARS-CoV-2: an observational cohort study SARS-CoV-2 viral load predicts COVID-19 mortality Droplets and aerosols in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Two metres or one: what is the evidence for physical distancing in covid-19? High-risk aerosol-generating procedures in COVID-19: respiratory protective equipment considerations A comparison of facemask and respirator filtration test methods PolitiFact: claim that N95 masks can't stop COVID-19 particles due to size is nonsense 2020 An overview of filtration efficiency through the masks: mechanisms of the aerosols penetration Influenza virus aerosols in human exhaled breath: particle size, culturability, and effect of surgical masks Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis Testing the efficacy of homemade masks: would they protect in an influenza pandemic Professional and home-made face masks reduce exposure to respiratory infections among the general population Could SARS-CoV-2 be transmitted via speech droplets? Amid the coronavirus crisis, a regimen for reentry Face masks against COVID-19: an evidence review COVID-19 Employer Information for office buildings Position Document on Infectious Aerosols Could air filtration reduce COVID-19 severity and spread? New England Complex Systems Institute Community outbreak investigation of SARS-CoV-2 transmission among bus riders in Eastern China Heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning systems in the context of COVID-19 Spectrum of virucidal activity from ultraviolet to infrared radiation Airborne spread of SARS-CoV-2 and a potential role for air disinfection Safety of upperroom ultraviolet germicidal air disinfection for room occupants: results from the Tuberculosis Ultraviolet Shelter Study Ultraviolet germicidal irradiation: future directions for air disinfection and building applications Applications of ultraviolet germicidal irradiation disinfection in health care facilities: effective adjunct, but not standalone technology ASHRAE position document on airborne infectious diseases. Reaffirmed by Technology Council Effectiveness of airport screening at detecting travellers infected with novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) International travels and fever screening during epidemics: a literature review on the effectiveness and potential use of non-contact infrared thermometers Estimated effectiveness of symptom and risk screening to prevent the spread of COVID-19 Recommendations-from-The-Aesthetic-Society-COVID-19-Safety-Task-Force-050520 A path to resume aesthetic care: executive summary of project AesCert guidance supplement-practical considerations for aesthetic medicine professionals supporting clinic preparedness in response to the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak Public health guidance for community-related exposure COVID-19 pandemic: consensus guidelines for preferred practices in an aesthetic clinic How COVID-19 spreads Safety guidelines for nonsurgical facial procedures during COVID-19 outbreak CDC. Social distancing. 2020. Available at guidance for risk assessment and work restrictions for healthcare personnel with potential exposure to COVID-19 Strategies to mitigate healthcare personnel staffing shortages American Society of Dermatologic Surgery Association (ASDSA) and American Society for Laser Medicine & Surgery (ASLMS) guidance for cosmetic dermatology practices during COVID-19 2020 Ocular tropism of respiratory viruses Viral infections in workers in hospital and research laboratory settings: a comparative review of infection modes and respective biosafety aspects COVID-19 safe cosmetic injecting guide Measures and suggestions for the prevention and control of the novel coronavirus in dental institutions Nosocomial transmission of emerging viruses via aerosol-generating medical procedures Implementing laser safety standards in the outpatient academic dermatology clinic: a quality improvement based study Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in different types of clinical specimens SARS-CoV-2 endothelial infection causes COVID-19 chilblains: histopathological, immunohistochemical and ultrastructural study of seven paediatric cases Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and dermatologists: potential biological hazards of laser surgery in epidemic area COVID-19 outbreak associated with air conditioning in restaurant Surgical smoke in dermatology: its hazards and management A Google trends analysis of facial plastic surgery interest during the COVID-19 pandemic American Society of Plastic Surgeons releases new guidance for resuming elective procedures amid COVID-19 2020 A post-quarantine plastic surgery boom is happening 2020 Cosmetic Practices in the COVID-19 Era