| Literature DB >> 31700587 |
Daniele Ignazio La Milia1, Sara Vincenti1, Barbara Fiori1,2, Fabio Pattavina1, Riccardo Torelli1, Andrea Barbara2, Malgorzata Wachocka1, Umberto Moscato1,2, Simona Sica1,2, Viviana Amato2, Walter Ricciardi1,2, Patrizia Laurenti1,2.
Abstract
Building-work activities could cause dust contamination and fungal spores' dissemination. A significant relationship was found between building-work activities and the incidence of invasive aspergillosis, in profoundly immunocompromised patients. Renovation-works activities were carried out by four building sites of the hematology ward in a Teaching Hospital without the interruption of clinical activities. These sites were monitored by environmental sampling to determine the particles and fungi count. Clinical surveillance was made using galactomannan antigen test as a proxy for invasive aspergillosis diagnosis. A definitive diagnosis of IA was confirmed by clinical and radiological features. The galactomannan antigen test showed no significant difference between presence (2,75%) and absence (5,03%) of renovation work activities (p=0,522). During the renovation activities, an increment of IA cases with respect to the control period was not recorded. The particle counts showed higher values of small and big-diameter particles before the renovation works if compared to the end of the activities. It was probably due to the containment measures implemented during and immediately after the final phases of the building site. The Fungi counts showed no significant differences between the phase before and after the renovation activities. Our findings show that is possible to perform renovation work, during clinical activities, by increasing clinical and environmental surveillance.Entities:
Keywords: Dust contamination; Hematology ward; Invasive aspergillosis; Protective measures; Renovation activities
Year: 2019 PMID: 31700587 PMCID: PMC6827607 DOI: 10.4084/MJHID.2019.062
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mediterr J Hematol Infect Dis ISSN: 2035-3006 Impact factor: 2.576
Figure 1Plan of Hematology ward under renovation activities. A) Building site 1 (BS1): the area marked by the black traced lines indicates the rooms undergoing restructuring (room1 and 2) and the phases in which environmental monitoring is carried out (T0 and T3 phases). The anteroom indicates the filter area accessible only to authorized personnel. The area outlined by the gray rectangle shows the rooms in which environmental monitoring is carried out during the initial and terminal phases of the construction site (T1 and T2 respectively). The area delimited with gray rectangle identifies the room in which environmental monitoring is carried out 1 week before the start of the works and which allows to define the Time of golden standard (TGS) value. B) Building site 2 (BS2) C) Building site 3 (BS3) and D) Building site 4 (BS4); the area marked by the black traced lines indicates the rooms undergoing restructuring (room1 and 2) and the phases in which environmental monitoring is carried out (T0 and T3 phases).
Figure 2Bar graphs show the results of the airborne particle count (APC). Particle size is reported in the title of each graph. The phases at which the particle count is carried out are indicated in the legend: T0 before the beginning of the renovation activities (A–C–E–G), T1 and T2 initial and terminal phases of the renovation activities (A–C–E–G), and T3 after the sanification of the renovated rooms (B–D–F–H). Time of golden standard (TGS) represents the baseline value of particle count recorded 1 week before the start of renovation activities.
Figure 3Total fungal counts were reported along the Y-axis from different building sites (BS1, BS2, BS3 and BS4). a) phases T0 (before the beginning of renovation activities), T1 at the beginning of activities and T2 at the end of activities and before the sanification procedures. The values of fungi total count for BS4 were b) phases T3 after the sanification of the renovated rooms. The presence of Aspergillus spp. was indicated by asterisk.
Categorization of risk-groups for IA.
| Group 1. | Group 2. | Group 3. | Group 4. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case period | 2,14% (3/104) | 35,58% (37/104) | 9,62% (10/104) | 51,92% (54/104) |
| control period | 1,44% (2/139) | 41,01% (57/139) | 24,46% (34/139) | 33,09% (46/139) |