The risk of indoor sports and culture events for the transmission of COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Moritz S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8376924 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeThe study aimed to identify potential risk factors for family transmission and to provide precautionary guidelines for the general public during novel Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) waves.MethodsA retrospective cohort study with numerous COVID-19 patients recruited was conducted in Shanghai. Epidemiological data including transmission details, demographics, vaccination status, symptoms, comorbidities, antigen test, living environment, residential ventilation, disinfection and medical treatment of each participant were collected and risk factors for family transmission were determined.ResultsA total of 2,334 COVID-19 patients participated. Compared with non-cohabitation infected patients, cohabitated ones were younger (p = 0.019), more commonly unvaccinated (p = 0.048) or exposed to infections (p < 0.001), and had higher rates of symptoms (p = 0.003) or shared living room (p < 0.001). Risk factors analysis showed that the 2019-nCov antigen positive (OR = 1.86, 95%CI 1.40-2.48, p < 0.001), symptoms development (OR = 1.86, 95%CI 1.34-2.58, p < 0.001), direct contact exposure (OR = 1.47, 95%CI 1.09-1.96, p = 0.010) were independent risk factors for the cohabitant transmission of COVID-19, and a separate room with a separate toilet could reduce the risk of family transmission (OR = 0.62, 95%CI 0.41-0.92, p = 0.018).ConclusionPatients showing negative 2019-nCov antigen tests, being asymptomatic, living in a separate room with a separate toilet, or actively avoiding direct contact with cohabitants were at low risk of family transmission, and the study recommended that avoiding direct contact and residential disinfection could reduce the risk of all cohabitants within the same house being infected with COVID-19.
| S-EPMC10213781 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The role of aerosolized SARS-CoV-2 viruses in airborne transmission of COVID-19 has been debated. The aerosols are transmitted through breathing and vocalization by infectious subjects. Some authors state that this represents the dominant route of spreading, while others dismiss the option. Here we present an adjustable algorithm to estimate the infection risk for different indoor environments, constrained by published data of human aerosol emissions, SARS-CoV-2 viral loads, infective dose and other parameters. We evaluate typical indoor settings such as an office, a classroom, choir practice, and a reception/party. Our results suggest that aerosols from highly infective subjects can effectively transmit COVID-19 in indoor environments. This "highly infective" category represents approximately 20% of the patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. We find that "super infective" subjects, representing the top 5-10% of subjects with a positive test, plus an unknown fraction of less-but still highly infective, high aerosol-emitting subjects-may cause COVID-19 clusters (>10 infections). In general, active room ventilation and the ubiquitous wearing of face masks (i.e., by all subjects) may reduce the individual infection risk by a factor of five to ten, similar to high-volume, high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtering. A particularly effective mitigation measure is the use of high-quality masks, which can drastically reduce the indoor infection risk through aerosols.
| S-EPMC7662582 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The current revival of the American economy is being predicated on social distancing, specifically the Six-Foot Rule, a guideline that offers little protection from pathogen-bearing aerosol droplets sufficiently small to be continuously mixed through an indoor space. The importance of airborne transmission of COVID-19 is now widely recognized. While tools for risk assessment have recently been developed, no safety guideline has been proposed to protect against it. We here build on models of airborne disease transmission in order to derive an indoor safety guideline that would impose an upper bound on the "cumulative exposure time," the product of the number of occupants and their time in an enclosed space. We demonstrate how this bound depends on the rates of ventilation and air filtration, dimensions of the room, breathing rate, respiratory activity and face mask use of its occupants, and infectiousness of the respiratory aerosols. By synthesizing available data from the best-characterized indoor spreading events with respiratory drop size distributions, we estimate an infectious dose on the order of 10 aerosol-borne virions. The new virus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2]) is thus inferred to be an order of magnitude more infectious than its forerunner (SARS-CoV), consistent with the pandemic status achieved by COVID-19. Case studies are presented for classrooms and nursing homes, and a spreadsheet and online app are provided to facilitate use of our guideline. Implications for contact tracing and quarantining are considered, and appropriate caveats enumerated. Particular consideration is given to respiratory jets, which may substantially elevate risk when face masks are not worn.
| S-EPMC8092463 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The classic Wells-Riley model is widely used for estimation of the transmission risk of airborne pathogens in indoor spaces. However, the predictive capability of this zero-dimensional model is limited as it does not resolve the highly heterogeneous spatiotemporal distribution of airborne pathogens, and the infection risk is poorly quantified for many pathogens. In this study we address these shortcomings by developing a novel spatiotemporally resolved Wells-Riley model for prediction of the transmission risk of different COVID-19 variants in indoor environments. This modelling framework properly accounts for airborne infection risk by incorporating the latest clinical data regarding viral shedding by COVID-19 patients and SARS-CoV-2 infecting human cells. The spatiotemporal distribution of airborne pathogens is determined via computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations of airflow and aerosol transport, leading to an integrated model of infection risk associated with the exposure to SARS-CoV-2, which can produce quantitative 3D infection risk map for a specific SARS-CoV-2 variant in a given indoor space. Application of this model to airborne COVID-19 transmission within a hospital ward demonstrates the impact of different virus variants and respiratory PPE upon transmission risk. With the emergence of highly contagious SARS-CoV-2 variants such as the Delta and Omicron strains, respiratory PPE alone may not provide effective protection. These findings suggest a combination of optimal ventilation and respiratory PPE must be developed to effectively control the transmission of COVID-19 in healthcare settings and indoor spaces in general. This generalised risk estimation framework has the flexibility to incorporate further clinical data as such becomes available, and can be readily applied to consider a wide range of factors that impact transmission risk, including location and movement of infectious persons, virus variant and stage of infection, level of PPE and vaccination of infectious and susceptible individuals, impacts of coughing, sneezing, talking and breathing, and natural and mechanised ventilation and filtration.
| S-EPMC8695516 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is known to be overdispersed, meaning that only a fraction of infected cases contributes to super-spreading. While cluster interventions are an effective measure for controlling pandemics due to the viruses' overdispersed nature, a quantitative assessment of the risk of clustering has yet to be sufficiently presented. Using systematically collected cluster surveillance data for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from June 2020 to June 2021 in Japan, we estimated the activity-dependent risk of clustering in 23 establishment types. The analysis indicated that elderly care facilities, welfare facilities for people with disabilities, and hospitals had the highest risk of clustering, with 4.65 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.43-4.87), 2.99 (2.59-3.46), and 2.00 (1.88-2.12) cluster reports per million event users, respectively. Risks in educational settings were higher overall among older age groups, potentially being affected by activities with close and uncontrollable contact during extracurricular hours. In dining settings, drinking and singing increased the risk by 10- to 70-fold compared with regular eating settings. The comprehensive analysis of the COVID-19 cluster records provides an additional scientific basis for the design of customized interventions.
| S-EPMC9967753 | biostudies-literature
Project description:During the normalized phase of COVID-19, droplets or aerosol particles produced by infected personnel are considered as the potential source of infection with uncertain exposure risk. As such, in densely populated open spaces, it is necessary to adopt strategies to mitigate the risk of infection disease transmission while providing sufficient ventilation air. An example of such strategies is use of physical barriers. In this study, the impact of barrier heights on the spread of aerosol particles is investigated in an open office environment with the well-designed ventilation mode and supply air rate. The risk of infection disease transmission is evaluated using simulation of particle concentration in different locations and subject to a number of source scenarios. It was found that a barrier height of at least 60 cm above the desk surface is needed to effectively prevent the transmission of viruses. For workstations within 4 m from the outlet, a 70 cm height is considered, and with a proper ventilation mode, it is shown that the barriers can reduce the risk of infection by 72%. However, for the workstations further away from the outlet (beyond 4 m), the effect of physical barrier cannot be that significant. In summary, this study provides a theoretical analysis for implementing physical barriers, as a low-cost mitigation strategy, subject to various height scenarios and investigation of their effectiveness in reducing the infection transmission probability.
| S-EPMC8278843 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has inflicted major economic and health burdens across the world. On the other hand, the potential airborne transmission of SARS-COV-2 via air can deeply undermine the effectiveness of countermeasures against spreading the disease. Therefore, there is an intense focus to look for ways to mitigate the COVID-19 spread within various indoor settings. This work systematically reviewed articles regarding airborne transmission of SARS-COV2 in various indoor settings since the onset of the pandemic. The systematic search was performed in Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed databases and has returned 19 original articles carefully screened with regard to inclusion and exclusion criteria. The results showed that the facilities, such as dormitories and classrooms, received the most attention followed by office buildings, healthcare facilities, residential buildings, and other potential enclosed spaces such as a metro wagon. Besides, the majority of the studies were conducted experimentally while other studies were done using computer simulations. United States (n = 5), Spain (n = 4) and China (n = 3) were the top three countries based on the number of performed research. Ventilation rate was the most influential parameter in controlling the infection spread. CO2 was the primary reference for viral spread in the buildings. The use of natural ventilation or a combination of mechanical and natural ventilations was found to be highly effective in the studies. The current work helps in furthering research on effective interventions to improve indoor air quality and control the spread of COVID-19 and other respiratory diseases.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40201-023-00847-0.
| S-EPMC9968468 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We aimed to determine absolute and relative risks of either symptomatic or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection for late cardiovascular (CV) events and all-cause mortality. We conducted a retrospective double cohort study of patients with either symptomatic or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19+ cohort) and its documented absence (COVID-19- cohort). The study investigators drew a simple random sample of records from all patients under the Oregon Health & Science University Healthcare (n = 65,585), with available COVID-19 test results, performed March 1, 2020 to September 13, 2020. Exclusion criteria were age <18 years and no established Oregon Health & Science University care. The primary outcome was a composite of CV morbidity and mortality. All-cause mortality was the secondary outcome. The study population included 1,355 patients (mean age 48.7 ± 20.5 years; 770 women [57%], 977 White non-Hispanic [72%]; 1,072 ensured [79%]; 563 with CV disease history [42%]). During a median 6 months at risk, the primary composite outcome was observed in 38 of 319 patients who were COVID-19+ (12%) and 65 of 1,036 patients who were COVID-19- (6%). In the Cox regression, adjusted for demographics, health insurance, and reason for COVID-19 testing, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with the risk for primary composite outcome (hazard ratio 1.71, 95% confidence interval 1.06 to 2.78, p = 0.029). Inverse probability-weighted estimation, conditioned for 31 covariates, showed that for every patient who was COVID-19+, the average time to all-cause death was 65.5 days less than when all these patients were COVID-19-: average treatment effect on the treated -65.5 (95% confidence interval -125.4 to -5.61) days, p = 0.032. In conclusion, either symptomatic or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with an increased risk for late CV outcomes and has a causal effect on all-cause mortality in a late post-COVID-19 period.
| S-EPMC9282909 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 outbreak has brought our lives to a sudden and complete lockdown. While the numbers of confirmed cases and deaths continue to rise, people around the world are taking brave actions to mitigate transmission and save lives. The role that sports play in this pandemic is unprecedented, fascinating, and reveals the immense impact sports has on every aspect of our lives. We must all do our part to keep each other safe until this outbreak subsides and sports and humanity are back to being greater than ever.Level of evidenceLevel V.
| S-EPMC7151370 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this study, we quantitatively assessed the effectiveness of systems for COVID-19 testing in small groups of sport teams that are semi-isolated from the general population by countermeasures against infection. Two types of group were assumed, and the dynamics of infection within each group was modeled by using a compartment model of infectious disease. One group (Group A) comprised domestic professional sports teams that play many games over a season while remaining within a relatively small region. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests were routinely conducted once every 2 weeks, and the number of infected individuals that could not be quarantined after identification by testing or checking for symptoms was defined as the risk. The other group (Group B) comprised teams that travel across borders for mass-gathering events like the Olympic and Paralympic Games. The teams were isolated for 2 weeks at their destination; frequent testing and checking for symptoms was conducted, and any infected individuals were quarantined. The number of infected individuals participating in games after the isolation period was defined as the risk. In Group A, the number of infected individuals detected by routinely conducted PCR testing was lower than the number of infected individuals detected by checking for symptoms, indicating that routine testing every 2 weeks was not very effective. In Group B, daily PCR testing was the most effective, followed by daily antigen testing. Dual testing, in which individuals with a positive antigen test were given an additional PCR test, was the least effective with an effect equal to PCR testing every other day. These results indicate that repeated testing does not necessarily increase the detection of infected individuals.
| S-EPMC8963550 | biostudies-literature