This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Background In healthcare settings in low- and middle-income countries, which frequently rely upon natural ventilation, the risk of aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2 remains poorly understood. We aimed to evaluate the risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 in naturally-ventilated hospital settings by measuring parameters of ventilation and comparing these findings with results of bioaerosol sampling. Methods We measured outdoor and room CO 2 to estimate absolute ventilation (liters per second [L/s]) from 9 hospitals in Bangladesh during October 2020 - February 2021. We estimated infectious risk across different spaces using a modified Wells-Riley equation. We collected air samples from these same spaces at 12.5 L/min over 30 minutes and performed RT-qPCR to detect SARS-CoV-2 N-gene. We used multivariable linear regression and calculated elasticity to identify characteristics associated with ventilation. Results Based on ventilation of 86 patient care areas and COVID-19 case numbers, we found that over a 40-hour exposure period, outpatient departments posed the highest median risk for infection (5.4%), followed by COVID intensive care units (1.8%). We detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA in 18.6% (16/86) of air samples. Ceiling height and total open area of doors and windows were found to have the greatest impact on ventilation. Conclusion Our findings provide evidence that naturally-ventilated healthcare settings may pose a high risk for exposure to SARS-CoV-2, particularly among non-COVID designated spaces, but improving parameters of ventilation can mitigate this risk.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Styczynski et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: