The source control effect of personal protection equipment and physical barrier on short-range airborne transmission

Refined design of ventilation systems to mitigate infection risk in hospital wards: Perspective from ventilation openings setting

To prevent respiratory infections between patients and medical workers, the transmission risk of airborne pollutants in hospital wards must be mitigated. The ventilation modes, which are regarded as an important strategy to minimize the infection risk, are challenging to be systematically designed. Studies have considered the effect of ventilation openings (inlets/outlets) or infected source locations on the airflow distribution, pollutant removal, and infection risk mitigation. However, the relationship (such as relative distance) between ventilation openings and infected sources is critical because it affects the direct exhaust of exhaled pollutants, which has not been thoroughly studied. To explore pollutant removal and infection prevention in wards, different ventilation modes (with varying ventilation openings) and infected patient locations must be jointly considered. This study investigated displacement ventilation (DV), downward ventilation (DWV), and stratum ventilation (SV) with 4, 6, and 10 scenarios of ventilation openings, respectively. The optimal ventilation mode and relative distance between outlets and infected patients were analyzed based on the simulated pollutant concentration fields and the evaluated infection risk. The pollutant removal effect and infection risk mitigation of SV in the ward were largely improved by 75% and 59% compared with DV and DWV, respectively. The average infection risk was reduced below 7% when a non-dimensional relative distance (a ratio of the actual distance to the cubic root of the ward volume) was less than 0.25 between outlets and infected patient. This study can serve as a guide for the systematic ventilation system design in hospitals during the epidemic.

A review on indoor airborne transmission of COVID-19– modelling and mitigation approaches

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.

What were the historical reasons for the resistance to recognizing airborne transmission during the COVID-19 pandemic?

The question of whether SARS-CoV-2 is mainly transmitted by droplets or aerosols has been highly controversial. We sought to explain this controversy through a historical analysis of transmission research in other diseases. For most of human history, the dominant paradigm was that many diseases were carried by the air, often over long distances and in a phantasmagorical way. This miasmatic paradigm was challenged in the mid to late 19th century with the rise of germ theory, and as diseases such as cholera, puerperal fever, and malaria were found to actually transmit in other ways. Motivated by his views on the importance of contact/droplet infection, and the resistance he encountered from the remaining influence of miasma theory, prominent public health official Charles Chapin in 1910 helped initiate a successful paradigm shift, deeming airborne transmission most unlikely. This new paradigm became dominant. However, the lack of understanding of aerosols led to systematic errors in the interpretation of research evidence on transmission pathways. For the next five decades, airborne transmission was considered of negligible or minor importance for all major respiratory diseases, until a demonstration of airborne transmission of tuberculosis (which had been mistakenly thought to be transmitted by droplets) in 1962. The contact/droplet paradigm remained dominant, and only a few diseases were widely accepted as airborne before COVID-19: those that were clearly transmitted to people not in the same room. The acceleration of interdisciplinary research inspired by the COVID-19 pandemic has shown that airborne transmission is a major mode of transmission for this disease, and is likely to be significant for many respiratory infectious diseases.