SARS-CoV-2 nosocomial infection: Real-world results of environmental surface testing from a large tertiary cancer center

Occurrence of Human Viruses on Fomites in the Environment: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Documenting the occurrence of viruses on fomites is crucial in determining the significance of fomite-mediated transmission and the potential use of fomites for environmental disease surveillance. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compile information on the occurrence of human viruses on fomites in the environment; we identified 134 peer-reviewed papers. We compiled sampling and measurement methods, results, quality control information, and whether virus data were compared with community health data from the papers. We conducted univariate and multivariate analyses to investigate if presence of virus on fomites was associated with virus type (enveloped, nonenveloped), sampling location (healthcare setting, nonhealthcare temporary setting, nonhealthcare nontemporary setting), and area of fomite swabbed (<50, 50-100, >100 cm2). Across 275 data sets from the 134 papers, there was the most data available for Coronaviridae and from fomites at hospitals. Positivity rates, defined as the percent positive fomite samples, were low (median = 6%). Data were available on viruses from 16 different viral families, but data on viruses from 9 families had few (n < 5) data sets. Many human virus families were not identified in this review (11 families). Less than 15% of the data sets reported virus concentrations in externally valid units (viruses per area of surface), and 16% provided a quantitative comparison between virus and health data. Virus type and area swabbed were significant predictors of virus presence on fomites, and the positivity rate of data sets collected from healthcare settings and nonhealthcare nontemporary settings (e.g., individual housing) were significantly higher than those collected in nonhealthcare temporary settings (e.g., restaurants). Data from this review indicates that viruses may be present on fomites, that fomite-mediated virus transmission may occur, and that fomites may provide information on circulation of infectious diseases in the community. However, more quantitative data on diverse viruses are needed, and method reporting needs significant improvements.

A longitudinal environmental surveillance study for SARS-CoV-2 from the emergency department of a teaching hospital in Hong Kong

BACKGROUND

Understanding factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 exposure risk in the hospital setting may help improve infection control measures for prevention.

AIM

To monitor SARS-CoV-2 exposure risk among healthcare workers and to identify risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 detection.

METHODS

Surface and air samples were collected longitudinally over 14 months spanning 2020-2022 at the Emergency Department (ED) of a teaching hospital in Hong Kong. SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA was detected by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction. Ecological factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 detection were analysed by logistic regression. A sero-epidemiological study was conducted in January to April 2021 to monitor SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence. A questionnaire was used to collect information on job nature and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) of the participants.

FINDINGS

SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected at low frequencies from surfaces (0.7%, n=2562) and air samples (1.6%, n=128). Crowding was identified as the main risk factor, as weekly ED attendance (OR=1.002, p=0.04) and sampling after peak-hours of ED attendance (OR=5.216, p=0.03) were associated with the detection of SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA from surfaces. The low exposure risk was corroborated by the zero seropositive rate among 281 participants by April 2021.

CONCLUSION

Crowding may introduce SARS-CoV-2 into ED through increased attendances. Multiple factors may have contributed to the low contamination of SARS-CoV-2 at the ED, including hospital infection control measures for screening ED attendees, high PPE compliance among healthcare workers, and various public health and social measures implemented to reduce community transmission in Hong Kong where a dynamic zero COVID-19 policy was adopted.

Mechanical Wiping Increases the Efficacy of Liquid Disinfectants on SARS-CoV-2

High-touch environmental surfaces are acknowledged as potential sources of pathogen transmission, particularly in health care settings where infectious agents may be readily abundant. Methods of disinfecting these surfaces often include direct application of a chemical disinfectant or simply wiping the surface with a disinfectant pre-soaked wipe (DPW). In this study, we examine the ability of four disinfectants, ethanol (EtOH), sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), chlorine dioxide (ClO2), and potassium monopersulfate (KMPS), to inactivate SARS-CoV-2 on a hard, non-porous surface, assessing the effects of concentration and contact time. The efficacy of DPWs to decontaminate carriers spiked with SARS-CoV-2, as well as the transferability of the virus from used DPWs to clean surfaces, is also assessed. Stainless steel carriers inoculated with approximately 6 logs of SARS-CoV-2 prepared in a soil load were disinfected within 5 min through exposure to 66.5% EtOH, 0.5% NaOCl, and 1% KMPS. The addition of mechanical wiping using DPWs impregnated with these biocides rendered the virus inactive almost immediately, with no viral transfer from the used DPW to adjacent surfaces. Carriers treated with 100 ppm of ClO2 showed a significant amount of viable virus remaining after 10 min of biocide exposure, while the virus was only completely inactivated after 10 min of treatment with 500 ppm of ClO2. Wiping SARS-CoV-2-spiked carriers with DPWs containing either concentration of ClO2 for 5 s left significant amounts of viable virus on the carriers. Furthermore, higher titers of infectious virus retained on the ClO2-infused DPWs were transferred to uninoculated carriers immediately after wiping. Overall, 66.5% EtOH, 0.5% NaOCl, and 1% KMPS appear to be highly effective biocidal agents against SARS-CoV-2, while ClO2 formulations are much less efficacious.