Literature DB >> 28736744

Computational fluid dynamics study on the influence of an alternate ventilation configuration on the possible flow path of infectious cough aerosols in a mock airborne infection isolation room.

Deepthi Sharan Thatiparti1, Urmila Ghia1, Kenneth R Mead2.   

Abstract

When infectious epidemics occur, they can be perpetuated within health care settings, potentially resulting in severe health care workforce absenteeism, morbidity, mortality, and economic losses. The ventilation system configuration of an airborne infection isolation room is one factor that can play a role in protecting health care workers from infectious patient bioaerosols. Though commonly associated with airborne infectious diseases, the airborne infection isolation room design can also impact other transmission routes such as short-range airborne as well as fomite and contact transmission routes that are impacted by contagion concentration and recirculation. This article presents a computational fluid dynamics study on the influence of the ventilation configuration on the possible flow path of bioaerosol dispersal behavior in a mock airborne infection isolation room. At first, a mock airborne infection isolation room was modeled that has the room geometry and layout, ventilation parameters, and pressurization corresponding to that of a traditional ceiling-mounted ventilation arrangement observed in existing hospitals. An alternate ventilation configuration was then modeled to retain the linear supply diffuser in the original mock airborne infection isolation room but interchanging the square supply and exhaust locations to place the exhaust closer to the patient source and allow clean air from supply vents to flow in clean-to-dirty flow paths, originating in uncontaminated parts of the room prior to entering the contaminated patient's air space. The modeled alternate airborne infection isolation room ventilation rate was 12 air changes per hour. Two human breathing models were used to simulate a source patient and a receiving health care worker. A patient cough cycle was introduced into the simulation, and the airborne infection dispersal was tracked in time using a multi-phase flow simulation approach. The results from the alternate configuration revealed that the cough aerosols were pulled by the exhaust vent without encountering the health care worker by 0.93 s after patient coughs and the particles were controlled as the aerosols' flow path was uninterrupted by an air particle streamline from patient to the ceiling exhaust venting out cough aerosols. However, not all the aerosols were vented out of the room. The remaining cough aerosols entered the health care worker's breathing zone by 0.98 s. This resulted in one of the critical stages in terms of the health care worker's exposure to airborne virus and presented the opportunity for the health care worker to suffer adverse health effects from the inhalation of cough aerosols. Within 2 s, the cough aerosols reentered and recirculated within the patient and health care worker's surroundings resulting in pockets of old contaminated air. By this time, coalescence losses decreased as the aerosol were no longer in very close proximity and their movement was primarily influenced by the airborne infection isolation room airflow patterns. In the patient and health care worker's area away from the supply, the fresh air supply failed to reach this part of the room to quickly dilute the cough aerosol concentration. The exhaust was also found to have minimal effect upon cough aerosol removal, except for those areas with high exhaust velocities, very close to the exhaust grill. Within 5-20 s after a patient's cough, the aerosols tended to break up to form smaller sized aerosols of less than one micron diameter. They remained airborne and entrained back into the supply air stream, spreading into the entire room. The suspended aerosols resulted in the floating time of more than 21 s in the room due to one cough cycle. The duration of airborne contagion in the room and its prolonged exposure to the health care worker is likely to happen due to successive coughing cycles. Hence, the evaluated alternate airborne infection isolation room is not effective in removing at least 38% particles exposed to health care worker within the first second of a patient's cough.

Entities:  

Year:  2016        PMID: 28736744      PMCID: PMC5516269          DOI: 10.1080/23744731.2016.1222212

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Technol Built Environ        ISSN: 2374-4731            Impact factor:   1.990


  17 in total

1.  Influenza outbreak detection and control measures in nursing homes in the United States.

Authors:  M M Zadeh; C Buxton Bridges; W W Thompson; N H Arden; K Fukuda
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 5.562

2.  Reintroduction of influenza A to a nursing building.

Authors:  P J Drinka; S Gravenstein; P Krause; L Nest; M Dissing; P Shult
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 3.254

3.  Studies on influenza in the pandemic of 1957-1958. I. An epidemiologic, clinical and serologic investigation of an intrahospital epidemic, with a note on vaccination efficacy.

Authors:  H L BLUMENFELD; E D KILBOURNE; D B LOURIA; D E ROGERS
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  1959-01       Impact factor: 14.808

4.  Assessment of Health-Care Worker Exposure to Pandemic Flu in Hospital Rooms.

Authors:  U Ghia; M Gressel; S Konangi; K Mead; A Kishore; G Earnest
Journal:  ASHRAE Trans       Date:  2012

5.  Large sequential outbreaks caused by influenza A (H3N2) and B viruses in an institution for the mentally handicapped.

Authors:  N Sugaya; N Kusumoto; Y Suzuki; R Nerome; K Nerome
Journal:  J Med Virol       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 2.327

6.  Influenza A among hospital personnel and patients. Implications for recognition, prevention, and control.

Authors:  C T Pachucki; S A Pappas; G F Fuller; S L Krause; J R Lentino; D M Schaaff
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1989-01

7.  Prevention of nosocomial influenza.

Authors:  K A Adal; R H Flowers; A M Anglim; F G Hayden; M G Titus; B J Coyner; B M Farr
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 3.254

8.  Influenza B: hospital activity during a community epidemic.

Authors:  B Bean; F S Rhame; R S Hughes; M D Weiler; L R Peterson; D N Gerding
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 2.803

Review 9.  Influenza in the acute hospital setting.

Authors:  Cassandra D Salgado; Barry M Farr; Keri K Hall; Frederick G Hayden
Journal:  Lancet Infect Dis       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 25.071

10.  Flow dynamics and characterization of a cough.

Authors:  J K Gupta; C-H Lin; Q Chen
Journal:  Indoor Air       Date:  2009-07-31       Impact factor: 5.770

View more
  10 in total

1.  Laboratory study of physical barrier efficiency for worker protection against SARS-CoV-2 while standing or sitting.

Authors:  Jacob Bartels; Cheryl Fairfield Estill; I-Chen Chen; Dylan Neu
Journal:  Aerosol Sci Technol       Date:  2022-01-05       Impact factor: 4.809

Review 2.  Ventilation strategies and design impacts on indoor airborne transmission: A review.

Authors:  Nima Izadyar; Wendy Miller
Journal:  Build Environ       Date:  2022-05-06       Impact factor: 7.093

Review 3.  The source and transport of bioaerosols in the air: A review.

Authors:  Wenwen Xie; Yanpeng Li; Wenyan Bai; Junli Hou; Tianfeng Ma; Xuelin Zeng; Liyuan Zhang; Taicheng An
Journal:  Front Environ Sci Eng       Date:  2020-12-17

4.  Computational investigation of prolonged airborne dispersion of novel coronavirus-laden droplets.

Authors:  Masashi Yamakawa; Atsuhide Kitagawa; Kiyota Ogura; Yongmann M Chung; Minsuok Kim
Journal:  J Aerosol Sci       Date:  2021-02-08       Impact factor: 3.433

5.  Spread of SARS-CoV-2 in hospital areas.

Authors:  Joan O Grimalt; Helem Vílchez; Pablo A Fraile-Ribot; Esther Marco; Antoni Campins; Jaime Orfila; Barend L van Drooge; Francisco Fanjul
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2021-09-20       Impact factor: 6.498

6.  Patient-worn endoscopy mask to protect against viral transmission.

Authors:  Andrew M Vahabzadeh-Hagh; Shiv H Patel; Joshua A Stramiello; Philip A Weissbrod
Journal:  Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol       Date:  2021-12-09

7.  Effects of upper respiratory tract anatomy and head movement on the buoyant flow and particle dispersion generated in a violent expiratory event.

Authors:  Jordi Pallares; Alexandre Fabregat; Salvatore Cito
Journal:  J Aerosol Sci       Date:  2022-07-22       Impact factor: 4.586

8.  Natural ventilation strategy and related issues to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) airborne transmission in a school building.

Authors:  Sowoo Park; Younhee Choi; Doosam Song; Eun Kyung Kim
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2021-05-15       Impact factor: 7.963

9.  Methodology for risk assessment of COVID-19 pandemic propagation.

Authors:  Maria Portarapillo; Almerinda Di Benedetto
Journal:  J Loss Prev Process Ind       Date:  2021-06-23       Impact factor: 3.660

10.  Computational Study of Thermal Comfort and Reduction of CO2 Levels inside a Classroom.

Authors:  Guillermo Efren Ovando-Chacon; Abelardo Rodríguez-León; Sandy Luz Ovando-Chacon; Martín Hernández-Ordoñez; Mario Díaz-González; Felipe de Jesús Pozos-Texon
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-03-03       Impact factor: 3.390

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.