Aerosol release, distribution, and prevention during aerosol therapy: a simulated model for infection control.

Aerosol therapy is used to deliver medical therapeutics directly to the airways to treat respiratory conditions. A potential consequence of this form of treatment is the release of fugitive aerosols, both patient derived and medical, into the environment and the subsequent exposure of caregivers and bystanders to potential viral infections. This study examined the release of these fugitive aerosols during a standard aerosol therapy to a simulated adult patient. An aerosol holding chamber and mouthpiece were connected to a representative head model and breathing simulator. A combination of laser and Schlieren imaging was used to non-invasively visualize the release and dispersion of fugitive aerosol particles. Time-varying aerosol particle number concentrations and size distributions were measured with optical particle sizers at clinically relevant positions to the simulated patient. The influence of breathing pattern, normal and distressed, supplemental air flow, at 0.2 and 6 LPM, and the addition of a bacterial filter to the exhalation port of the mouthpiece were assessed. Images showed large quantities of fugitive aerosols emitted from the unfiltered mouthpiece. The images and particle counter data show that the addition of a bacterial filter limited the release of these fugitive aerosols, with the peak fugitive aerosol concentrations decreasing by 47.3-83.3%, depending on distance from the simulated patient. The addition of a bacterial filter to the mouthpiece significantly reduces the levels of fugitive aerosols emitted during a simulated aerosol therapy, p≤ .05, and would greatly aid in reducing healthcare worker and bystander exposure to potentially harmful fugitive aerosols.

An in vitro visual study of fugitive aerosols released during aerosol therapy to an invasively ventilated simulated patient.

COVID-19 can cause serious respiratory complications resulting in the need for invasive ventilatory support and concurrent aerosol therapy. Aerosol therapy is considered a high risk procedure for the transmission of patient derived infectious aerosol droplets. Critical-care workers are considered to be at a high risk of inhaling such infectious droplets. The objective of this work was to use noninvasive optical methods to visualize the potential release of aerosol droplets during aerosol therapy in a model of an invasively ventilated adult patient. The noninvasive Schlieren imaging technique was used to visualize the movement of air and aerosol. Three different aerosol delivery devices: (i) a pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI), (ii) a compressed air driven jet nebulizer (JN), and (iii) a vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN), were used to deliver an aerosolized therapeutic at two different positions: (i) on the inspiratory limb at the wye and (ii) on the patient side of the wye, between the wye and endotracheal tube, to a simulated intubated adult patient. Irrespective of position, there was a significant release of air and aerosol from the ventilator circuit during aerosol delivery with the pMDI and the compressed air driven JN. There was no such release when aerosol therapy was delivered with a closed-circuit VMN. Selection of aerosol delivery device is a major determining factor in the release of infectious patient derived bioaerosol from an invasively mechanically ventilated patient receiving aerosol therapy.

A Flexible Enclosure to Protect Respiratory Therapists During Aerosol-Generating Procedures.

BACKGROUND: Exposure of respiratory therapists (RTs) during aerosol-generating procedures such as endotracheal intubation is an occupational hazard. Depending on the hospital, RTs may serve as laryngoscopist or in a role providing ventilation support and initiating mechanical ventilation. This study aimed to evaluate the potential exposure of RTs serving in either of these roles. METHODS: We set up a simulated patient with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in an ICU setting requiring endotracheal intubation involving a laryngoscopist, a nurse, and an RT supporting the laryngoscopist. All participants wore appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE). A fluorescent marker was sprayed by an atomizer during the procedure using 3 different methods for endotracheal intubation. The 3 techniques included PPE alone, a polycarbonate intubating box, or a coronavirus flexible enclosure, which consisted of a Mayo stand with plastic covering. The laryngoscopist and the supporting RT were assessed with a black light for contamination with the fluorescent marker. All simulations were recorded. RESULTS: When using only PPE, both the laryngoscopist and the RT were grossly contaminated. When using the intubating box, the laryngoscopist's contamination was detectable only on the gloves: the gown and face shield remained uncontaminated; the RT was still grossly contaminated on the gloves, gown, neck, and face shield. When using the coronavirus flexible enclosure system, both the laryngoscopist and the RT were better protected, with contamination detected only on the gloves of the laryngoscopist and the RT. CONCLUSIONS: Of the 3 techniques, the coronavirus flexible enclosure contained the fluorescent marker more effectively during endotracheal intubation than PPE alone or the intubating box based on exposure of the laryngoscopist and supporting RT. Optimizing containment during aerosol-generating procedures like endotracheal intubation is a critical component of minimizing occupational and nosocomial spread of SARS-CoV-2 to RTs who may serve as either the laryngoscopist or a support role.