Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Journal of Building Engineering ; : 105599, 2022.
Article in English | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-2122630

ABSTRACT

In the past few years, significant efforts have been made to investigate the transmission of COVID-19. This paper provides a review of the COVID-19 airborne transmission modeling and mitigation strategies. The simulation models here are classified into airborne transmission infectious risk models and numerical approaches for spatiotemporal airborne transmissions. Mathematical descriptions and assumptions on which these models have been based are discussed. Input data used in previous simulation studies to assess the dispersion of COVID-19 are extracted and reported. Moreover, measurements performed to study the COVID-19 airborne transmission within indoor environments are introduced to support validations for anticipated future modeling studies. Transmission mitigation strategies recommended in recent studies have been classified to include modifying occupancy and ventilation operations, using filters and air purifiers, installing ultraviolet (UV) air disinfection systems, and personal protection compliance, such as wearing masks and social distancing. The application of mitigation strategies to various building types, such as educational, office, public, residential, and hospital, is reviewed. Recommendations for future works are also discussed based on the current apparent knowledge gaps covering both modeling and mitigation approaches. Our findings show that different transmission mitigation measures were recommended for various indoor environments;however, there is no conclusive work reporting their combined effects on the level of mitigation that may be achieved. Moreover, further studies should be conducted to understand better the balance between approaches to mitigating the viral transmissions in buildings and building energy consumption.

2.
CMAJ Open ; 10(2): E450-E459, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1863310

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The exposure risks to front-line health care workers caring for patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection undergoing surgery or obstetric delivery are unclear, and an understanding of sample types that may harbour virus is important for evaluating risk. We sought to determine whether SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA from patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection undergoing surgery or obstetric delivery was present in the peritoneal cavity of male and female patients, in the female reproductive tract, in the environment of the surgery or delivery suite (surgical instruments or equipment used, air or floors), and inside the masks of the attending health care workers. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study from November 2020 to May 2021 at 2 tertiary academic Toronto hospitals, during urgent surgeries or obstetric deliveries for patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The presence of SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA in patient, environmental and air samples was identified by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Air samples were collected using both active and passive sampling techniques. The primary outcome was the proportion of health care workers' masks positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. We included adult patients with positive RT-PCR nasal swab undergoing obstetric delivery or urgent surgery (from across all surgical specialties). RESULTS: A total of 32 patients (age 20-88 yr) were included. Nine patients had obstetric deliveries (6 cesarean deliveries), and 23 patients (14 male) required urgent surgery from the orthopedic or trauma, general surgery, burn, plastic surgery, cardiac surgery, neurosurgery, vascular surgery, gastroenterology and gynecologic oncology divisions. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 20 of 332 (6%) patient and environmental samples collected: 4 of 24 (17%) patient samples, 5 of 60 (8%) floor samples, 1 of 54 (2%) air samples, 10 of 23 (43%) surgical instrument or equipment samples, 0 of 24 cautery filter samples and 0 of 143 (95% confidence interval 0-0.026) inner surface of mask samples. INTERPRETATION: During the study period of November 2020 to May 2021, we found evidence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in a small but important number of samples obtained in the surgical and obstetric operative environment. The finding of no detectable virus inside the masks worn by the health care teams would suggest a low risk of infection for health care workers using appropriate personal protective equipment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Operating Rooms , RNA, Viral/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Young Adult
3.
J Infect Dis ; 225(5): 768-776, 2022 03 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1722480

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We determined the burden of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in air and on surfaces in rooms of patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and investigated patient characteristics associated with SARS-CoV-2 environmental contamination. METHODS: Nasopharyngeal swabs, surface, and air samples were collected from the rooms of 78 inpatients with COVID-19 at 6 acute care hospitals in Toronto from March to May 2020. Samples were tested for SARS-CoV-2 ribonucleic acid (RNA), cultured to determine potential infectivity, and whole viral genomes were sequenced. Association between patient factors and detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in surface samples were investigated. RESULTS: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 RNA was detected from surfaces (125 of 474 samples; 42 of 78 patients) and air (3 of 146 samples; 3 of 45 patients); 17% (6 of 36) of surface samples from 3 patients yielded viable virus. Viral sequences from nasopharyngeal and surface samples clustered by patient. Multivariable analysis indicated hypoxia at admission, polymerase chain reaction-positive nasopharyngeal swab (cycle threshold of ≤30) on or after surface sampling date, higher Charlson comorbidity score, and shorter time from onset of illness to sampling date were significantly associated with detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in surface samples. CONCLUSIONS: The infrequent recovery of infectious SARS-CoV-2 virus from the environment suggests that the risk to healthcare workers from air and near-patient surfaces in acute care hospital wards is likely limited.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Nasopharynx/virology , Respiratory Aerosols and Droplets , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Adult , Aged , Air Microbiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , Canada/epidemiology , Environmental Exposure , Health Personnel , Humans , Inpatients , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
4.
Viruses ; 12(8)2020 08 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-717763

ABSTRACT

Genome sequencing of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is increasingly important to monitor the transmission and adaptive evolution of the virus. The accessibility of high-throughput methods and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) has facilitated a growing ecosystem of protocols. Two differing protocols are tiling multiplex PCR and bait capture enrichment. Each method has advantages and disadvantages but a direct comparison with different viral RNA concentrations has not been performed to assess the performance of these approaches. Here we compare Liverpool amplification, ARTIC amplification, and bait capture using clinical diagnostics samples. All libraries were sequenced using an Illumina MiniSeq with data analyzed using a standardized bioinformatics workflow (SARS-CoV-2 Illumina GeNome Assembly Line; SIGNAL). One sample showed poor SARS-CoV-2 genome coverage and consensus, reflective of low viral RNA concentration. In contrast, the second sample had a higher viral RNA concentration, which yielded good genome coverage and consensus. ARTIC amplification showed the highest depth of coverage results for both samples, suggesting this protocol is effective for low concentrations. Liverpool amplification provided a more even read coverage of the SARS-CoV-2 genome, but at a lower depth of coverage. Bait capture enrichment of SARS-CoV-2 cDNA provided results on par with amplification. While only two clinical samples were examined in this comparative analysis, both the Liverpool and ARTIC amplification methods showed differing efficacy for high and low concentration samples. In addition, amplification-free bait capture enriched sequencing of cDNA is a viable method for generating a SARS-CoV-2 genome sequence and for identification of amplification artifacts.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/genetics , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , RNA, Viral/genetics , Base Sequence , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , DNA, Complementary/genetics , Genome, Viral , Humans , Molecular Epidemiology , Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Whole Genome Sequencing/methods
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL