11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Dose-response Relation Deduced for Coronaviruses From Coronavirus Disease 2019, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome: Meta-analysis Results and its Application for Infection Risk Assessment of Aerosol Transmission

      1 , 2 , 1 , 2
      Clinical Infectious Diseases
      Oxford University Press (OUP)

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          A comprehensive understanding of the transmission routes of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is of great importance to effectively control the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the fundamental dose-response relation is missing for evaluation of the infection risk.

          Methods

          We developed a simple framework to integrate the a priori dose-response relation for SARS-CoV-2 based on mice experiments, the recent data on infection risk from a meta-analysis, and respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath to shed light on the dose-response relation for humans. The aerosol transmission infection risk was evaluated based on the dose-response model for a typical indoor environment.

          Results

          The developed dose-response relation is an exponential function with a constant k in the range of about 6.4 × 104 to 9.8 × 105 virus copies, which means that the infection risk caused by 1 virus copy in viral shedding is on the order of 10–6 to 10–5. The median infection risk via aerosol transmission with 1-hour exposure (10–6 to 10–4) was significantly lower than the risk caused by close contact (10–1) in a room with an area of 10 to 400 m2 with 1 infected individual in it and with a typical ventilation rate of 1 air change per hour.

          Conclusions

          The infection risk caused by aerosol transmission was significantly lower than the risk caused by close contact. It is still necessary to be cautious for the potential aerosol transmission risk in small rooms with prolonged exposure duration.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

          Summary Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes COVID-19 and is spread person-to-person through close contact. We aimed to investigate the effects of physical distance, face masks, and eye protection on virus transmission in health-care and non-health-care (eg, community) settings. Methods We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the optimum distance for avoiding person-to-person virus transmission and to assess the use of face masks and eye protection to prevent transmission of viruses. We obtained data for SARS-CoV-2 and the betacoronaviruses that cause severe acute respiratory syndrome, and Middle East respiratory syndrome from 21 standard WHO-specific and COVID-19-specific sources. We searched these data sources from database inception to May 3, 2020, with no restriction by language, for comparative studies and for contextual factors of acceptability, feasibility, resource use, and equity. We screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We did frequentist and Bayesian meta-analyses and random-effects meta-regressions. We rated the certainty of evidence according to Cochrane methods and the GRADE approach. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020177047. Findings Our search identified 172 observational studies across 16 countries and six continents, with no randomised controlled trials and 44 relevant comparative studies in health-care and non-health-care settings (n=25 697 patients). Transmission of viruses was lower with physical distancing of 1 m or more, compared with a distance of less than 1 m (n=10 736, pooled adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0·18, 95% CI 0·09 to 0·38; risk difference [RD] −10·2%, 95% CI −11·5 to −7·5; moderate certainty); protection was increased as distance was lengthened (change in relative risk [RR] 2·02 per m; p interaction=0·041; moderate certainty). Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection (n=2647; aOR 0·15, 95% CI 0·07 to 0·34, RD −14·3%, −15·9 to −10·7; low certainty), with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar (eg, reusable 12–16-layer cotton masks; p interaction=0·090; posterior probability >95%, low certainty). Eye protection also was associated with less infection (n=3713; aOR 0·22, 95% CI 0·12 to 0·39, RD −10·6%, 95% CI −12·5 to −7·7; low certainty). Unadjusted studies and subgroup and sensitivity analyses showed similar findings. Interpretation The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis support physical distancing of 1 m or more and provide quantitative estimates for models and contact tracing to inform policy. Optimum use of face masks, respirators, and eye protection in public and health-care settings should be informed by these findings and contextual factors. Robust randomised trials are needed to better inform the evidence for these interventions, but this systematic appraisal of currently best available evidence might inform interim guidance. Funding World Health Organization.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            It is Time to Address Airborne Transmission of COVID-19

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Size distribution and sites of origin of droplets expelled from the human respiratory tract during expiratory activities

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Clinical Infectious Diseases
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                1058-4838
                1537-6591
                July 01 2021
                July 01 2021
                October 29 2020
                July 01 2021
                July 01 2021
                October 29 2020
                : 73
                : 1
                : e241-e245
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Institute of Environmental Engineering, Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatics Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zürich (ETH Zürich), Zürich, Switzerland
                [2 ]Laboratory for Advanced Analytical Technologies, Department of Mobility, Energy and Environment, Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology (Empa), Dübendorf, Switzerland
                Article
                10.1093/cid/ciaa1675
                21bbd07a-0011-43a2-9441-7dfeaa26b881
                © 2020

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article