Sampling Methods and Risk Stratification Regarding Environmental Contamination by SARS-CoV-2
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/16215 |
Resumo: | Introduction: Transmission of COVID-19 through close contact and droplets is well established, but the influence of aerosol and surface contamination remains to be determined. Literature is scarce and inconsistent about the viable virus particles free-distance from infected patients, as well as about different swabbing methods for surface contamination evaluation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the most sensitive method for the assessment of surface contamination, classify the likelihood of environmental contamination in risk zones and compare the environmental contamination between oxygenation and ventilatory support.Material and Methods: Swabs from potentially contaminated surfaces in a COVID-19 ward, with patients treated with different types of oxygen and ventilatory support, were collected. Three types of swabs were compared in order to evaluate the most sensitive collection method. For risk zone categorization, areas were divided according to the distance from the patient.Results: Of the 63 swabs collected, 17 (27%) tested positive for the presence of SARS-CoV-2. The highest positivity rate was observed with the sterile premoistened swab with saline (n = 8; 38%), but without statistically significant differences. The highest number of positive samples were collected from the high-risk zones, specifically those located one meter from the patient (n = 13; 48%), with statistically significant differences. Only the rooms of patients supported with non-invasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula had evidence of bedroom contamination, with 45% and 27% of swab positivity, with statistically significant differences.Discussion: Our findings favour the premoistened swab without transport medium for surface contamination assessment, even though without statistical differences. A statistically significant trend supporting the division in risk zones, according to the distance from the patient, was also identified. The higher positivity rate from the non-invasive ventilation and high-flow nasal cannula bedrooms suggests a significant association between ventilatory strategies and surface contamination, probably due to higher particle dispersion.Conclusion: Our findings support the use of the sterile premoistened swab without preservation medium, the classification of risk areas considering the distance from the patient, and the variability of RNA dispersion between oxygenation and ventilatory support. |
id |
RCAP_3487db10db0d0d203e7eae5aa2a3e835 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.www.actamedicaportuguesa.com:article/16215 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Sampling Methods and Risk Stratification Regarding Environmental Contamination by SARS-CoV-2Métodos de Colheita de Amostras e Estratificação de Risco Relativo à Contaminação Ambiental pelo SARS-CoV-2AerosolsCOVID-19Equipment ContaminationSARS-CoV-2AerossóisContaminação de EquipamentosCOVID-19SARS-CoV-2Introduction: Transmission of COVID-19 through close contact and droplets is well established, but the influence of aerosol and surface contamination remains to be determined. Literature is scarce and inconsistent about the viable virus particles free-distance from infected patients, as well as about different swabbing methods for surface contamination evaluation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the most sensitive method for the assessment of surface contamination, classify the likelihood of environmental contamination in risk zones and compare the environmental contamination between oxygenation and ventilatory support.Material and Methods: Swabs from potentially contaminated surfaces in a COVID-19 ward, with patients treated with different types of oxygen and ventilatory support, were collected. Three types of swabs were compared in order to evaluate the most sensitive collection method. For risk zone categorization, areas were divided according to the distance from the patient.Results: Of the 63 swabs collected, 17 (27%) tested positive for the presence of SARS-CoV-2. The highest positivity rate was observed with the sterile premoistened swab with saline (n = 8; 38%), but without statistically significant differences. The highest number of positive samples were collected from the high-risk zones, specifically those located one meter from the patient (n = 13; 48%), with statistically significant differences. Only the rooms of patients supported with non-invasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula had evidence of bedroom contamination, with 45% and 27% of swab positivity, with statistically significant differences.Discussion: Our findings favour the premoistened swab without transport medium for surface contamination assessment, even though without statistical differences. A statistically significant trend supporting the division in risk zones, according to the distance from the patient, was also identified. The higher positivity rate from the non-invasive ventilation and high-flow nasal cannula bedrooms suggests a significant association between ventilatory strategies and surface contamination, probably due to higher particle dispersion.Conclusion: Our findings support the use of the sterile premoistened swab without preservation medium, the classification of risk areas considering the distance from the patient, and the variability of RNA dispersion between oxygenation and ventilatory support.Introdução: A transmissão da COVID-19 através do contacto e gotículas está bem estabelecida, mas a importância da sua transmissão através do aerossol e da contaminação das superfícies permanece por determinar. A literatura é escassa e inconsistente em relação à distância mínima livre de partículas víricas, desde um paciente, e também acerca dos mais adequados métodos de colheita de zaragatoas para avaliação da contaminação das superfícies. Os objectivos deste estudo foram avaliar qual o método mais sensível para avaliação da contaminação de superfícies, classificar a contaminação ambiental de acordo com zonas de risco e comparar a contaminação ambiental sob diferentes dispositivos para oxigenoterapia e suporte ventilatório.Material e Métodos: Realizamos colheitas de zaragatoas em superfícies potencialmente contaminadas numa ala COVID-19, onde se encontravam doentes sob diferentes dispositivos para oxigenoterapia e suporte ventilatório. Para avaliar o método de recolha mais sensível para verificação da contaminação das superfícies, comparámos três tipos de zaragatoas. Para a classificação das zonas de risco, dividimos as áreas de acordo com a distância ao doente.Resultados: Das 63 zaragatoas, 17 (27%) testaram positivo para SARS-CoV-2 (27%). A maior positividade foi observada na zaragatoa estéril pré-humedecida com soro fisiológico (n = 8; 38%), mas sem significância estatística. O maior número de amostras positivas obteve-se nas zonas de alto risco, especialmente aquelas a um metro do paciente (n = 13; 48%), com diferenças significativas. Apenas os quartos dos doentes sob ventilação não invasiva e cânula nasal de alto fluxo tiveram evidência de contaminação com 45% e 27% de positividade das zaragatoas, e significância estatística.Discussão: Os nossos resultados favorecem a zaragatoa estéril pré-humedecida sem meio de preservação para avaliação da contaminação das superfícies, embora sem significância estatística. Os resultados suportam também com significância estatística a divisão em zonas de risco de acordo com a distância ao doente. A maior positividade obtida nos quartos dos pacientes que se encontravam a utilizar ventilação não invasiva e cânula nasal de alto fluxo sugere uma associação, com significância, entre as estratégias ventilatória e a contaminação ambiental, provavelmente relacionada com uma maior dispersão das partículas.Conclusão: Os nossos resultados apoiam o uso da zaragatoa estéril pré-humedecida sem meio de preservação, a classificação das áreas de risco considerando a distância ao doente, e a variabilidade da dispersão do RNA entre diferentes dispositivos para oxigenoterapia e ventilação.Ordem dos Médicos2021-12-02info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/16215oai:ojs.www.actamedicaportuguesa.com:article/16215Acta Médica Portuguesa; Vol. 34 No. 12 (2021): Dezembro; 851-856Acta Médica Portuguesa; Vol. 34 N.º 12 (2021): Dezembro; 851-8561646-07580870-399Xreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/16215https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/16215/6354Direitos de Autor (c) 2021 Acta Médica Portuguesainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMendes, MartaAndrade Oliveira, AnaPires, OlgaBranca, FernandoBeirão, MariaSanta-Cruz, AndréCarvalho, AlexandreAlves, Joana2022-12-20T11:07:46Zoai:ojs.www.actamedicaportuguesa.com:article/16215Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T16:20:45.559515Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Sampling Methods and Risk Stratification Regarding Environmental Contamination by SARS-CoV-2 Métodos de Colheita de Amostras e Estratificação de Risco Relativo à Contaminação Ambiental pelo SARS-CoV-2 |
title |
Sampling Methods and Risk Stratification Regarding Environmental Contamination by SARS-CoV-2 |
spellingShingle |
Sampling Methods and Risk Stratification Regarding Environmental Contamination by SARS-CoV-2 Mendes, Marta Aerosols COVID-19 Equipment Contamination SARS-CoV-2 Aerossóis Contaminação de Equipamentos COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 |
title_short |
Sampling Methods and Risk Stratification Regarding Environmental Contamination by SARS-CoV-2 |
title_full |
Sampling Methods and Risk Stratification Regarding Environmental Contamination by SARS-CoV-2 |
title_fullStr |
Sampling Methods and Risk Stratification Regarding Environmental Contamination by SARS-CoV-2 |
title_full_unstemmed |
Sampling Methods and Risk Stratification Regarding Environmental Contamination by SARS-CoV-2 |
title_sort |
Sampling Methods and Risk Stratification Regarding Environmental Contamination by SARS-CoV-2 |
author |
Mendes, Marta |
author_facet |
Mendes, Marta Andrade Oliveira, Ana Pires, Olga Branca, Fernando Beirão, Maria Santa-Cruz, André Carvalho, Alexandre Alves, Joana |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Andrade Oliveira, Ana Pires, Olga Branca, Fernando Beirão, Maria Santa-Cruz, André Carvalho, Alexandre Alves, Joana |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Mendes, Marta Andrade Oliveira, Ana Pires, Olga Branca, Fernando Beirão, Maria Santa-Cruz, André Carvalho, Alexandre Alves, Joana |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Aerosols COVID-19 Equipment Contamination SARS-CoV-2 Aerossóis Contaminação de Equipamentos COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 |
topic |
Aerosols COVID-19 Equipment Contamination SARS-CoV-2 Aerossóis Contaminação de Equipamentos COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 |
description |
Introduction: Transmission of COVID-19 through close contact and droplets is well established, but the influence of aerosol and surface contamination remains to be determined. Literature is scarce and inconsistent about the viable virus particles free-distance from infected patients, as well as about different swabbing methods for surface contamination evaluation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the most sensitive method for the assessment of surface contamination, classify the likelihood of environmental contamination in risk zones and compare the environmental contamination between oxygenation and ventilatory support.Material and Methods: Swabs from potentially contaminated surfaces in a COVID-19 ward, with patients treated with different types of oxygen and ventilatory support, were collected. Three types of swabs were compared in order to evaluate the most sensitive collection method. For risk zone categorization, areas were divided according to the distance from the patient.Results: Of the 63 swabs collected, 17 (27%) tested positive for the presence of SARS-CoV-2. The highest positivity rate was observed with the sterile premoistened swab with saline (n = 8; 38%), but without statistically significant differences. The highest number of positive samples were collected from the high-risk zones, specifically those located one meter from the patient (n = 13; 48%), with statistically significant differences. Only the rooms of patients supported with non-invasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula had evidence of bedroom contamination, with 45% and 27% of swab positivity, with statistically significant differences.Discussion: Our findings favour the premoistened swab without transport medium for surface contamination assessment, even though without statistical differences. A statistically significant trend supporting the division in risk zones, according to the distance from the patient, was also identified. The higher positivity rate from the non-invasive ventilation and high-flow nasal cannula bedrooms suggests a significant association between ventilatory strategies and surface contamination, probably due to higher particle dispersion.Conclusion: Our findings support the use of the sterile premoistened swab without preservation medium, the classification of risk areas considering the distance from the patient, and the variability of RNA dispersion between oxygenation and ventilatory support. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-12-02 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/16215 oai:ojs.www.actamedicaportuguesa.com:article/16215 |
url |
https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/16215 |
identifier_str_mv |
oai:ojs.www.actamedicaportuguesa.com:article/16215 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/16215 https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/16215/6354 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Direitos de Autor (c) 2021 Acta Médica Portuguesa info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Direitos de Autor (c) 2021 Acta Médica Portuguesa |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Ordem dos Médicos |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Ordem dos Médicos |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Acta Médica Portuguesa; Vol. 34 No. 12 (2021): Dezembro; 851-856 Acta Médica Portuguesa; Vol. 34 N.º 12 (2021): Dezembro; 851-856 1646-0758 0870-399X reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799130655840272384 |