Contamination of Air and Surfaces in Workplaces with SARS-CoV-2 Virus: A Systematic Review
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Objectives
This systematic review aimed to evaluate the evidence for air and surface contamination of workplace environments with SARS-CoV-2 RNA and the quality of the methods used to identify actions necessary to improve the quality of the data.
Methods
We searched Web of Science and Google Scholar until 24 December 2020 for relevant articles and extracted data on methodology and results.
Results
The vast majority of data come from healthcare settings, with typically around 6% of samples having detectable concentrations of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and almost none of the samples collected had viable virus. There were a wide variety of methods used to measure airborne virus, although surface sampling was generally undertaken using nylon flocked swabs. Overall, the quality of the measurements was poor. Only a small number of studies reported the airborne concentration of SARS-CoV-2 virus RNA, mostly just reporting the detectable concentration values without reference to the detection limit. Imputing the geometric mean air concentration assuming the limit of detection was the lowest reported value, suggests typical concentrations in healthcare settings may be around 0.01 SARS-CoV-2 virus RNA copies m−3. Data on surface virus loading per unit area were mostly unavailable.
Conclusions
The reliability of the reported data is uncertain. The methods used for measuring SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses in work environments should be standardized to facilitate more consistent interpretation of contamination and to help reliably estimate worker exposure.
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.01.25.21250233: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Following the initial literature search we set up a Google Scholar alert using the same search terms as used initially. Google Scholarsuggested: (Google Scholar, RRID:SCR_008878)Data were summarised graphically using the DataGraph software. DataGraphsuggested: NoneFor datasets with more than one detectable result in a dataset of 10 or more measurements we used the elnormCensored function in in the R-package EnvStats v2.3.1 to estimate the geometric mean and associated 95% … SciScore for 10.1101/2021.01.25.21250233: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Following the initial literature search we set up a Google Scholar alert using the same search terms as used initially. Google Scholarsuggested: (Google Scholar, RRID:SCR_008878)Data were summarised graphically using the DataGraph software. DataGraphsuggested: NoneFor datasets with more than one detectable result in a dataset of 10 or more measurements we used the elnormCensored function in in the R-package EnvStats v2.3.1 to estimate the geometric mean and associated 95% confidence intervals using the maximum likelihood method. R-packagesuggested: NoneEnvStatssuggested: NoneResults from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:Despite all these limitations, the available data suggests that higher levels of detectable air contamination is associated with higher surface contamination. The most likely explanation for this is that the main source of surface contamination is fine aerosol rather than droplet spray or transfer from the hands of workers or patients. In most healthcare settings the measured airborne concentrations of SARS-CoV-2 virus RNA were low, with likely geometric mean levels around 0.01 RNA copies/m3, and the same is undoubtedly the case for surface contamination. The highest concentrations measured in healthcare settings were in excess of 10,000 RNA copies/m3 air and around 170,000 RNA copies/cm2 surface. Data from public transport settings are limited and there are no data on environmental contamination from other higher risk workplaces such as personal service occupations, factory workers and other non-medical essential workers24. Of course, detection of RNA does not mean that there was viable virus present, and in almost all cases the concentration in samples was too low to successfully culture virus. In the one study that successfully cultured virus from four air samples the proportion of virus RNA that was viable ranged from 38% to 79%14. It is also important to understand the concentration of viable virus that may give rise to a meaningful level of transmission risk. Karimzadeh et al3 estimated that the infective dose of SARS-CoV-19 by aerosol is around 300 virus particles, whi...
Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-
