ABSTRACT
The aim of this study is to quantify the BIAS in air pollution (PM2.5, NO2) exposure estimates that arise from neglecting population activity under COVID-19 lockdown conditions. We applied mobility data as derived from different sources (Google, Eurostat, Automatic Identification System, etc.) to model the impact of (1) changing emissions and (2) the change in population activity patterns in a European multi-city (Hamburg, Liège, Marseille) exposure study. Our results show significant underestimations of exposure estimates when activity profiles are either neglected or not adjusted for lockdown conditions. © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
ABSTRACT
To estimate potential chemical risk, tools are needed to prioritize potential exposures for chemicals with minimal data. Consumer product exposures are a key pathway, and variability in consumer use patterns is an important factor. We designed Ex Priori, a flexible dashboard-type screening-level exposure model, to rapidly visualize exposure rankings from consumer product use. Ex Priori is Excel-based. Currently, it is parameterized for seven routes of exposure for 1108 chemicals present in 228 consumer product types. It includes toxicokinetics considerations to estimate body burden. It includes a simple framework for rapid modeling of broad changes in consumer use patterns by product category. Ex Priori rapidly models changes in consumer user patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic and instantly shows resulting changes in chemical exposure rankings by body burden. Sensitivity analysis indicates that the model is sensitive to the air emissions rate of chemicals from products. Ex Priori's simple dashboard facilitates dynamic exploration of the effects of varying consumer product use patterns on prioritization of chemicals based on potential exposures. Ex Priori can be a useful modeling and visualization tool to both novice and experienced exposure modelers and complement more computationally intensive population-based exposure models.
ABSTRACT
A company COVID-19 Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Guideline was implemented globally, as part of a larger control measure toolset, to minimize the potential for SARS-CoV-2 aerosol transmission. The COVID-19 Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Guideline informed and provided the process to optimize existing ventilation systems, set occupancy duration limits, and set clearance periods for a given space. Aerosol transmission modeling was used extensively to determine space limitations to reduce the potential for aerosol transmission in various manufacturing, lab, warehouse, aircraft, and administrative workspaces. This paper focuses on the modeling completed for administrative spaces (e.g., offices, conference rooms, restrooms, elevators) due to their lower ventilation rates, higher occupant densities, and greater vocalization levels. A detailed description of how the Guideline was implemented, with examples showing the evaluation and determinations made for specific spaces, is provided. World-wide implementation of this Guideline, as one of the layers of protection, was a key component in the overall strategy to reduce aerosol transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Subject(s)
Air Pollution, Indoor , COVID-19 , Aerosols , Air Pollution, Indoor/prevention & control , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , VentilationABSTRACT
The linear dose-response relationship has long been assumed in assessments of health risk from an incremental chemical emission relative to background emissions. In this study, we systematically examine the relevancy of such an assumption with real-world data. We used the reported emission data, as background emissions, from the 2017 U.S. National Emission Inventory for 95 organic chemicals to estimate the central tendencies of exposures of the general U.S. population. Previously published nonlinear dose-response relationships for chemicals were used to estimate health risk from exposure. We also explored and identified four intervals of exposure in which the nonlinear dose-response relationship may be linearly approximated with fixed slopes. Predicted rates of exposure to these 95 chemicals are all within the lowest of the four intervals and associated with low health risk. The health risk may be overestimated if a slope on the dose-response relationship extrapolated from toxicological assays based on high response rates is used for a marginal increase in emission not substantially higher than background emissions. To improve the confidence of human health risk estimates for chemicals, future efforts should focus on deriving a more accurate dose-response relationship at lower response rates and interface it with exposure assessments.
ABSTRACT
The routes of COVID-19 transmission to healthcare personnel from infected patients is the subject of debate, but is critical to the selection of personal protective equipment. The objective of this paper was to explore the contributions of three transmission routes-contact, droplet, and inhalation-to the risk of occupationally acquired COVID-19 infection among healthcare personnel (HCP). The method was quantitative microbial risk assessment, and an exposure model, where possible model parameters were based on data specific to the SARS-CoV-2 virus when available. The key finding was that droplet and inhalation transmission routes predominate over the contact route, contributing 35%, 57%, and 8.2% of the probability of infection, on average, without use of personal protective equipment. On average, 80% of inhalation exposure occurs when HCP are near patients. The relative contribution of droplet and inhalation depends upon the emission of SARS-CoV-2 in respirable particles (<10 µm) through exhaled breath, and inhalation becomes predominant, on average, when emission exceeds five gene copies per min. The predicted concentration of SARS-CoV-2 in the air of the patient room is low (< 1 gene copy per m3 on average), and likely below the limit of quantification for many air sampling methods. The findings demonstrate the value of respiratory protection for HCP, and that field sampling may not be sensitive enough to verify the contribution of SARS-CoV-2 inhalation to the risk of occupationally acquired COVID-19 infection among healthcare personnel. The emission and infectivity of SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory droplets of different sizes is a critical knowledge gap for understanding and controlling COVID-19 transmission.