RESUMEN
Rationale: Patients with severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) require supplemental oxygen and ventilatory support. It is unclear whether some respiratory support devices may increase the dispersion of infectious bioaerosols and thereby place healthcare workers at increased risk of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).Objectives: To quantitatively compare viral dispersion from invasive and noninvasive respiratory support modalities.Methods: This study used a simulated ICU room with a breathing-patient simulator exhaling nebulized bacteriophages from the lower respiratory tract with various respiratory support modalities: invasive ventilation (through an endotracheal tube with an inflated cuff connected to a mechanical ventilator), helmet ventilation with a positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) valve, noninvasive bilevel positive-pressure ventilation, nonrebreather face masks, high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO), and nasal prongs.Measurements and Main Results: Invasive ventilation and helmet ventilation with a PEEP valve were associated with the lowest bacteriophage concentrations in the air, and HFNO and nasal prongs were associated with the highest concentrations. At the intubating position, bacteriophage concentrations associated with HFNO (2.66 × 104 plaque-forming units [PFU]/L of air sampled), nasal prongs (1.60 × 104 PFU/L of air sampled), nonrebreather face masks (7.87 × 102 PFU/L of air sampled), and bilevel positive airway pressure (1.91 × 102 PFU/L of air sampled) were significantly higher than those associated with invasive ventilation (P < 0.05 for each). The difference between bacteriophage concentrations associated with helmet ventilation with a PEEP valve (4.29 × 10-1 PFU/L of air sampled) and bacteriophage concentrations associated with invasive ventilation was not statistically significant.Conclusions: These findings highlight the potential differential risk of dispersing virus among respiratory support devices and the importance of appropriate infection prevention and control practices and personal protective equipment for healthcare workers when caring for patients with transmissible respiratory viral infections such as SARS-CoV-2.
Asunto(s)
Cuidados Críticos/métodos , ADN Viral/análisis , Transmisión de Enfermedad Infecciosa/prevención & control , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/terapia , Ventiladores Mecánicos/efectos adversos , Virosis/virología , Virus/genética , Humanos , Virosis/prevención & control , Virosis/transmisiónRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: It is unclear whether supplemental oxygen and noninvasive ventilation respiratory support devices increase the dispersion of potentially infectious bioaerosols in a pressurized air medical cabin. This study quantitatively compared particle dispersion from respiratory support modalities in an air medical cabin during flight. METHODS: Dispersion was measured in a fixed wing air ambulance during flight with a breathing medical mannequin simulator exhaling nebulized saline from the lower respiratory tract with the following respiratory support modalities: a nasal cannula with a surgical mask, high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) with a surgical mask, and noninvasive bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) ventilation. RESULTS: Nasal cannula oxygen with a surgical mask was associated with the highest particle concentrations. In the absence of mask seal leaks, BiPAP was associated with 1 order of magnitude lower particle concentration compared with a nasal cannula with a surgical mask. Particle concentrations associated with HFNO with a surgical mask were lower than a nasal cannula with a surgical mask but higher than BiPAP. CONCLUSIONS: Particle dispersion associated with the use of BiPAP and HFNO with a surgical mask is lower than nasal cannula oxygen with a surgical mask. These findings may assist air medical organizations with operational decisions where little data exist about respiratory particle dispersion.