Aerosols should not be defined by distance travelled

Airborne transmission of respiratory viruses including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has had a wide-ranging and profound impact on how we think about the transmission of respiratory viruses This review outlines the basis on which we should consider all respiratory viruses as aerosol-transmissible infections, in order to improve our control of these pathogens in both healthcare and community settings.

RECENT FINDINGS

We present recent studies to support the aerosol transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and some older studies to demonstrate the aerosol transmissibility of other, more familiar seasonal respiratory viruses.

SUMMARY

Current knowledge on how these respiratory viruses are transmitted, and the way we control their spread, is changing. We need to embrace these changes to improve the care of patients in hospitals and care homes including others who are vulnerable to severe disease in community settings.

Mechanisms, Techniques and Devices of Airborne Virus Detection: A Review

Airborne viruses, such as COVID-19, cause pandemics all over the world. Virus-containing particles produced by infected individuals are suspended in the air for extended periods, actually resulting in viral aerosols and the spread of infectious diseases. Aerosol collection and detection devices are essential for limiting the spread of airborne virus diseases. This review provides an overview of the primary mechanisms and enhancement techniques for collecting and detecting airborne viruses. Indoor virus detection strategies for scenarios with varying ventilations are also summarized based on the excellent performance of existing advanced comprehensive devices. This review provides guidance for the development of future aerosol detection devices and aids in the control of airborne transmission diseases, such as COVID-19, influenza and other airborne transmission viruses.

A CFD-based framework to assess airborne infection risk in buildings

The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted huge efforts to further the scientific knowledge of indoor ventilation and its relationship to airborne infection risk. Exhaled infectious aerosols are spread and inhaled as a result of room airflow characteristics. Many calculation methods and assertions on risk assume 'well-mixed' flow conditions. However, ventilation in buildings is complex and often not showing well-mixed conditions. Ventilation guidance is typically based on the provision of generic minimum ventilation flow rates for a given space, irrespective of the effectiveness in the delivery of the supply air. Furthermore, the airflow might be heavily affected by the season, the HVAC ventilation, or the opening of windows, which would potentially generate draughts and non-uniform conditions. As a result, fresh air concentration would be variable depending upon a susceptible receptor's position in a room and, therefore, associated airborne infection risk. A computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and dynamic thermal modelling (DTM) framework is proposed to assess the influence of internal airflow characteristics on airborne infection risk. A simple metric is proposed, the hourly airborne infection rate (HAI) which can easily help designers to stress-test the ventilation within a building under several conditions. A case study is presented, and the results clearly demonstrate the importance of understanding detailed indoor airflow characteristics and associated concentration patterns in order to provide detailed design guidance, e.g. occupancy, supply air diffusers and furniture layouts, to reduce airborne infection risk.

Long distance airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2: rapid systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the potential for long distance airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in indoor community settings and to investigate factors that might influence transmission.

DESIGN

Rapid systematic review and narrative synthesis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, medRxiv, Arxiv, and WHO COVID-19 Research Database for studies published from 27 July 2020 to 19 January 2022; existing relevant rapid systematic review for studies published from 1 January 2020 to 27 July 2020; and citation analysis in Web of Science and Cocites.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION

Observational studies reporting on transmission events in indoor community (non-healthcare) settings in which long distance airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 was the most likely route. Studies such as those of household transmission where the main transmission route was likely to be close contact or fomite transmission were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data extraction was done by one reviewer and independently checked by a second reviewer. Primary outcomes were SARS-CoV-2 infections through long distance airborne transmission (>2 m) and any modifying factors. Methodological quality of included studies was rated using the quality criteria checklist, and certainty of primary outcomes was determined using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Narrative synthesis was themed by setting.

RESULTS

22 reports relating to 18 studies were identified (methodological quality was high in three, medium in five, and low in 10); all the studies were outbreak investigations. Long distance airborne transmission was likely to have occurred for some or all transmission events in 16 studies and was unclear in two studies (GRADE: very low certainty). In the 16 studies, one or more factors plausibly increased the likelihood of long distance airborne transmission, particularly insufficient air replacement (very low certainty), directional air flow (very low certainty), and activities associated with increased emission of aerosols, such as singing or speaking loudly (very low certainty). In 13 studies, the primary cases were reported as being asymptomatic, presymptomatic, or around symptom onset at the time of transmission. Although some of the included studies were well conducted outbreak investigations, they remain at risk of bias owing to study design and do not always provide the level of detail needed to fully assess transmission routes.

CONCLUSION

This rapid systematic review found evidence suggesting that long distance airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 might occur in indoor settings such as restaurants, workplaces, and venues for choirs, and identified factors such as insufficient air replacement that probably contributed to transmission. These results strengthen the need for mitigation measures in indoor settings, particularly the use of adequate ventilation.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021236762.

Bioaerosols and airborne transmission: Integrating biological complexity into our perspective

There is broad consensus that airborne disease transmission continues to be the thematic focus of COVID-19, the complexities and understanding of which continues to complicate our attempts to control this pandemic. Masking used as both personal protection and source reduction predominates our society at present and, other than vaccination, remains the public health measure that will faithfully reduce aerosol transmission and overall disease burden (Gandhi and Marr, 2021). Early in the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, and especially after preliminary recognition of airborne transmission, there was considerable efforts in the application of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling aerosols as well as risk models calculations, the products of which were detailed in the literature (Morawska et al., 2020; Buonanno et al., 2020a) and even disseminated in media destined for the public. As the respiratory pathway emerged as the dominant exposure pathway for SARSCoV-2 transmission, much of what was promoted from CFD was applied to risk models to estimate community infection and in some cases expected clinical outcome. COVID-19 proved to fit the profile of an obligate respiratory-transmitted pathogen, and the plausibility of using aerosol modeling when silhouetted with emerging COVID-19 epidemiology provided ample evidence for promotion of masking and ventilation optimization as a required public health measure. Masking is often included as a factor in developed risk models and it remains an essentially important part of our response to this airborne threat, and ultimately will agnostically reduce disease burden although efforts to improve ventilation in indoor spaces remain a challenge. Arguably the most important concept in the airborne transmission of infectious agents is the biologically active componentry that comprises the aerosol particle and the functional dynamic nature of particle contents. Specifically, the innate generation, transport, and ultimate deposition/disposition of bioaerosols; the aerosol particles that nearly exclusively harbor bioactive components, including viruses, when disease agents are transmitted through the air.

Joint Effects of Socioeconomic Position, Race/Ethnicity, and Gender on COVID-19 Mortality among Working-Age Adults in the United States

Substantial racial/ethnic and gender disparities in COVID-19 mortality have been previously documented. However, few studies have investigated the impact of individual socioeconomic position (SEP) on these disparities. Objectives: To determine the joint effects of SEP, race/ethnicity, and gender on the burden of COVID-19 mortality. A secondary objective was to determine whether differences in opportunities for remote work were correlated with COVID-19 death rates for sociodemographic groups. Design: Annual mortality study which used a special government tabulation of 2020 COVID-19-related deaths stratified by decedents' SEP (measured by educational attainment), gender, and race/ethnicity. Setting: United States in 2020. Participants: COVID-19 decedents aged 25 to 64 years old (n = 69,001). Exposures: Socioeconomic position (low, intermediate, and high), race/ethnicity (Hispanic, Black, Asian, Indigenous, multiracial, and non-Hispanic white), and gender (women and men). Detailed census data on occupations held by adults in 2020 in each of the 36 sociodemographic groups studied were used to quantify the possibility of remote work for each group. Main Outcomes and Measures: Age-adjusted COVID-19 death rates for 36 sociodemographic groups. Disparities were quantified by relative risks and 95% confidence intervals. High-SEP adults were the (low-risk) referent group for all relative risk calculations. Results: A higher proportion of Hispanics, Blacks, and Indigenous people were in a low SEP in 2020, compared with whites. COVID-19 mortality was five times higher for low vs. high-SEP adults (72.2 vs. 14.6 deaths per 100,000, RR = 4.94, 95% CI 4.82-5.05). The joint detriments of low SEP, Hispanic ethnicity, and male gender resulted in a COVID-19 death rate which was over 27 times higher (178.0 vs. 6.5 deaths/100,000, RR = 27.4, 95% CI 25.9-28.9) for low-SEP Hispanic men vs. high-SEP white women. In regression modeling, percent of the labor force in never remote jobs explained 72% of the variance in COVID-19 death rates. Conclusions and Relevance: SARS-CoV-2 infection control efforts should prioritize low-SEP adults (i.e., the working class), particularly the majority with "never remote" jobs characterized by inflexible and unsafe working conditions (i.e., blue collar, service, and retail sales workers).

"SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted by particulate air pollution": Misinterpretations of statistical data, skewed citation practices, and misuse of specific terminology spreading the misconception

In epidemiology, there are still outdated myths associated with the spread of respiratory infections. Recently, we have witnessed the origination of a new misconception, to the effect that SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted in the open air by way of particulate air pollution (atmospheric particulate matter (PM)). There is no evidence to support the idea behind this misconception. Nevertheless, more and more people are involved in animated debate and the number of studies concerning atmospheric PM as a carrier of SARS-CoV-2 is growing rapidly. In this work, the origin of the misconception was investigated, and the published papers which have contributed to the spread of this myth were analyzed. The results show that the following factors lie behind the origin and spread of the misconception: a) The specific terminology is not always clearly defined or consistently used by scientists. In particular, the terms 'particulate matter', 'atmospheric aerosol particles', 'air pollutants', and 'atmospheric aerosols' need to be clarified, and besides they are often equated to 'infectious aerosols', 'virus-bearing aerosols', 'bio-aerosols', 'virus-laden particles', 'respiratory aerosol/droplets', and 'droplet nuclei'. b) Authors misinterpret statistical data and information from other sources. Interpretation of the correlation between PM levels and the increasing incidence and severity of COVID-19 infection, is often changed from "PM may reflect the indirect action of certain atmospheric conditions that maintain infectious nuclei suspended for prolonged periods, parameters that also act on atmospheric pollutants" to "PM could cause an increase in infectious droplets/aerosols containing SARS-CoV-2." This is a dramatic change to the meaning. Moreover, it is often not taken into account that PM may reflect activities in areas with high population density and this population density at the same time contributes to the spread COVID-19. c) Skewed citation practices. Many authors cite a hypothetical conclusion from an original study, then other authors cite the papers of these authors as primary sources. This practice leads to the effect that there are many witnesses to a 'phenomenon' that did not ever occur. Thus, the terminology used in interdisciplinary communications should be more nuanced and defined precisely. Authors should be more careful when citing unconfirmed data (and hypotheses) as well as in interpreting statistical data so as to avoid confusion and spreading false information. This is especially important now in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Control of airborne infectious disease in buildings: Evidence and research priorities

The evolution of SARS-CoV-2 virus has resulted in variants likely to be more readily transmitted through respiratory aerosols, underscoring the increased potential for indoor environmental controls to mitigate risk. Use of tight-fitting face masks to trap infectious aerosol in exhaled breath and reduce inhalation exposure to contaminated air is of critical importance for disease control. Administrative controls including the regulation of occupancy and interpersonal spacing are also important, while presenting social and economic challenges. Indoor engineering controls including ventilation, exhaust, air flow control, filtration, and disinfection by germicidal ultraviolet irradiation can reduce reliance on stringent occupancy restrictions. However, the effects of controls-individually and in combination-on reducing infectious aerosol transfer indoors remain to be clearly characterized to the extent needed to support widespread implementation by building operators. We review aerobiologic and epidemiologic evidence of indoor environmental controls against transmission and present a quantitative aerosol transfer scenario illustrating relative differences in exposure at close-interactive, room, and building scales. We identify an overarching need for investment to implement building controls and evaluate their effectiveness on infection in well-characterized and real-world settings, supported by specific, methodological advances. Improved understanding of engineering control effectiveness guides implementation at scale while considering occupant comfort, operational challenges, and energy costs.