ABSTRACT
Waste and sanitation workers provide essential services to society. In most low-and middle-income countries, they are often mistreated and lack access to necessary personal protective equipment (PPE) and hygiene facilities that ensure occupational safety in workplaces. COVID-19 has also imposed serious health risks upon these worker groups. This study explores factors associated with poor occupational health and safety based on a conceptual framework. We conducted 499 surveys with five categories of waste and sanitation workers across ten cities in Bangladesh. We performed descriptive analysis and used Firth's logistic regression model following the conceptual framework. The analysis revealed consistent distinctions between workers considered to be in “safe” versus “unsafe” working conditions. The result showed that workers had not been adequately trained, not provided with proper equipment, and many had an informal status that prevented access to hygiene facilities. The workers who received occupational training, knew how to prevent COVID-19 by wearing a face mask, hand washing, and maintaining social distance, maintained protective measures, and practiced proper disposing of PPEs were more likely to be in safe condition. Initiatives to improve the situation of the waste workers who work in unsafe work conditions are still inadequate. Therefore, we recommend supplying proper protective equipment, ensuring a regular supply of gender-specific PPEs, and providing functional facilities necessary to practice personal hygiene and occupational safety, such as handwashing stations, changing rooms, and disposal facilities of used PPEs at the workplace. We also urge increased institutional management procedures, infrastructure that facilitates hygiene practices, and social policies to reduce occupational hazards for the waste workers in Bangladesh during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.
ABSTRACT
Background - There currently is substantial controversy about the role played by SARS-CoV-2 in aerosols in disease transmission, due in part to detections of viral RNA but failures to isolate viable virus from clinically generated aerosols. Methods - Air samples were collected in the room of two COVID-19 patients, one of whom had an active respiratory infection with a nasopharyngeal (NP) swab positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-qPCR. By using VIVAS air samplers that operate on a gentle water-vapor condensation principle, material was collected from room air and subjected to RT-qPCR and virus culture. The genomes of the SARS-CoV-2 collected from the air and of virus isolated in cell culture from air sampling and from a NP swab from a newly admitted patient in the room were sequenced. Findings - Viable virus was isolated from air samples collected 2 to 4.8m away from the patients. The genome sequence of the SARS-CoV-2 strain isolated from the material collected by the air samplers was identical to that isolated from the NP swab from the patient with an active infection. Estimates of viable viral concentrations ranged from 6 to 74 TCID50 units/L of air. Interpretation - Patients with respiratory manifestations of COVID-19 produce aerosols in the absence of aerosol-generating procedures that contain viable SARS-CoV-2, and these aerosols may serve as a source of transmission of the virus.