Dataset Information

Disinfection methods against SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019, has caused millions of deaths worldwide. The virus is transmitted by inhalation of infectious particles suspended in the air, direct deposition on mucous membranes and indirect contact via contaminated surfaces. Disinfection methods that can halt such transmission are important in this pandemic and in future viral infections.

Aim

To highlight the efficacy of several disinfection methods against SARS-CoV-2 based on up-to-date evidence found in the literature.

Methods

Two databases were searched to identify studies that assessed disinfection methods used against SARS-CoV-2. In total, 1229 studies were identified and 60 of these were included in this review. Quality assessment was evaluated by the Office of Health Assessment and Translation's risk-of-bias tool.

Findings

Twenty-eight studies investigated disinfection methods on environmental surfaces, 16 studies investigated disinfection methods on biological surfaces, four studies investigated disinfection methods for airborne coronavirus, and 16 studies investigated methods used to recondition personal protective equipment (PPE).

Conclusions

Several household and hospital disinfection agents and ultraviolet-C (UV-C) irradiation were effective for inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 on environmental surfaces. Formulations containing povidone-iodine can provide virucidal action on the skin and mucous membranes. In the case of hand hygiene, typical soap bars and alcohols can inactivate SARS-CoV-2. Air filtration systems incorporated with materials that possess catalytic properties, UV-C devices and heating systems can reduce airborne viral particles effectively. The decontamination of PPE can be conducted safely by heat and ozone treatment.

SUBMITTER: Viana Martins CP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8522489 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The ongoing COVID-19 global pandemic has necessitated evaluating various disinfection technologies for reducing viral transmission in public settings. Ultraviolet (UV) radiation can inactivate pathogens and viruses but more insight is needed into the performance of different UV wavelengths and their applications. We observed greater than a 3-log reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infectivity with a dose of 12.5 mJ/cm2 of 254 nm UV light when the viruses were suspended in PBS, while a dose of 25 mJ/cm2 was necessary to achieve a similar reduction when they were in an EMEM culture medium containing 2%(v/v) FBS, highlighting the critical effect of media in which the virus is suspended, given that SARS-CoV-2 is always aerosolized when airborne or deposited on a surface. It was found that SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility (a measure of the effectiveness of the UV light) in a buffer such as PBS was 4.4-fold greater than that in a cell culture medium. Furthermore, we discovered the attenuation of UVC disinfection by amino acids, vitamins, and niacinamide, highlighting the importance of determining UVC dosages under a condition close to aerosols that wrap the viruses. We developed a disinfection model to determine the effect of the environment on UVC effectiveness with three different wavelengths, 222 nm, 254 nm, and 265 nm. An inverse correlation between the liquid absorbance and the viral susceptibility was observed. We found that 222 nm light was most effective at reducing viral infectivity in low absorbing liquids such as PBS, whereas 265 nm light was most effective in high absorbing liquids such as cell culture medium. Viral susceptibility was further decreased in N95 masks with 222 nm light being the most effective. The safety of 222 nm was also studied. We detected changes to the mechanical properties of the stratum corneum of human skins when the 222 nm accumulative exposure exceeded 50 J/cm2.The findings highlight the need to evaluate each UV for a given application, as well as limiting the dose to the lowest dose necessary to avoid unnecessary exposure to the public.

Project description:Introductionaccording to the World Health Organization (WHO), COVID-19 is an infectious disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, responsible for an increasing number of cases and deaths. From a preventive and therapeutic point of view, there are two concerns that affect institutions and healthcare professionals: global immunization (which is still far from being achieved) and the availability of drugs capable of preventing its consequences in the infected patient. In this sense, the role that melatonin can play is has been assessed in the recent literature. Justification and Objectives: the serious health, social and economic consequences of COVID-19 have forced an urgent search for preventive methods, such as vaccines, among others, and therapeutic methods that could be alternatives to the drugs currently used. In this sense, it must be accepted that one of the most recommended has been the administration of melatonin. The present study proposes to carry out a systematic review of its possible role in the treatment and/or prevention of COVID-19. Material and methods: a systematic review of the literature related to the prevention of COVID-19 through the administration of melatonin was carried out, following the sequence proposed by the Prisma Declaration regarding the identification and selection of documents, using the specialized health databases Trip Medical Database, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline Plus, BVS, Cuiden and generic databases such as Dialnet, Web of Science and Google Scholar for their retrieval. Appropriate inclusion and exclusion criteria are described for the articles assessed. The main limitation of the study has been the scarcity of works and the lack of defining a specific protocol in terms of dosage and administration schedule. Results: once the selection process was completed, and after an in-depth critical analysis, 197 papers were selected, and 40 of them were finally used. The most relevant results were: (1) melatonin prevents SARS-CoV-2 infection, (2) although much remains to be clarified, at high doses, it seems to have a coadjuvant therapeutic effect in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection and (3) melatonin is effective against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Discussion: until group immunization is achieved in the population, it seems clear that we must continue to treat patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, and, in the absence of a specific and effective antiviral therapy, it is advisable to continue researching and providing drugs that demonstrate validity based on the scientific evidence. In this regard, we believe that the available studies recommend the administration of melatonin for its anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, immunomodulatory, sleep-inducing, CD147, Mpro, p65 and MMP9 protein suppressing, nephrotoxicity-reducing and highly effective and safe effects. Conclusions: (1) melatonin has anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, immunomodulatory, and Mpro and MMP9 protein-inhibitory activity. (2) It has been shown to have a wide margin of safety. (3) The contributions reviewed make it an effective therapeutic alternative in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. (4) Further clinical trials are recommended to clearly define the administration protocol.

Project description:Individuals who get involved in the disinfection of public settings using sodium hypochlorite might suffer adverse health effects. However, scarce information is available on the potential oxidative stress damage caused at low concentrations typically used for disinfection. We aimed to assess whether exposure to sodium hypochlorite during the COVID-19 pandemic causes oxidative stress damage in workers engaged in disinfection tasks. 75 operators engaged in the disinfection of public places were recruited as the case group, and 60 individuals who were not exposed to disinfectant were chosen as the control group. Spot urine samples were collected before (BE) and after exposure (AE) to disinfectants in the case group. Likewise, controls provided two spot urine samples in the same way as the case group. Urinary malondialdehyde (MDA) levels were quantified by forming thiobarbituric acid reactive substances in the urine. In addition, the concentration of 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG) in the urine was determined using an ELISA kit. Results showed significant differences in the urinary levels of oxidative stress markers, where median 8-OHdG (AE case: 3.84 ± 2.89 μg/g creatinine vs AE control 2.54 ± 1.21 μg/g creatinine) and MDA (AE case: 169 ± 89 μg/g creatinine vs AE control 121 ± 47 μg/g creatinine) levels in case group AE samples were 1.55 and 1.35-times higher than the control group AE samples (P < 0.05), respectively. Besides, urinary levels of oxidative stress markers in AE samples of the case group were significantly higher than in BE samples (8-OHdG BE 3.40 ± 1.95 μg/g creatinine, MDA BE 136 ± 51.3 μg/g creatinine, P < 0.05). Our results indicated that exposure to even low levels of sodium hypochlorite used in disinfection practices might cause oxidative stress related damage. With this in mind, implementing robust protective measures, such as specific respirators, is crucial to reduce the health burdens of exposure to disinfectants.

Project description:BackgroundVaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are used to reduce the risk of developing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Despite the significant benefits in terms of reduced risk of hospitalization and death, different adverse events may present after vaccination: among them, headache is one of the most common, but nowadays there is no summary presentation of its incidence and no description of its main features.MethodsWe searched PubMed and EMBASE covering the period between January 1st 2020 and August 6th, 2021, looking for record in English and with an abstract and using three main search terms (with specific variations): COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2; Vaccination; headache/adverse events. We selected manuscript including information on subjects developing headache after injection, and such information had to be derived from a structured form (i.e. no free reporting). Pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Analyses were carried out by vaccine vs. placebo, by first vs. second dose, and by mRNA-based vs. "traditional" vaccines; finally, we addressed the impact of age and gender on post-vaccine headache onset.ResultsOut of 9338 records, 84 papers were included in the review, accounting for 1.57 million participants, 94% of whom received BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1. Headache was generally the third most common AE: it was detected in 22% (95% CI 18-27%) of subjects after the first dose of vaccine and in 29% (95% CI 23-35%) after the second, with an extreme heterogeneity. Those receiving placebo reported headache in 10-12% of cases. No differences were detected across different vaccines or by mRNA-based vs. "traditional" ones. None of the studies reported information on headache features. A lower prevalence of headache after the first injection of BNT162b2 among older participants was shown.ConclusionsOur results show that vaccines are associated to a two-fold risk of developing headache within 7 days from injection, and the lack of difference between vaccine types enable to hypothesize that headache is secondary to systemic immunological reaction than to a vaccine-type specific reaction. Some descriptions report onset within the first 24 h and that in around one-third of the cases, headache has migraine-like features with pulsating quality, phono and photophobia; in 40-60% of the cases aggravation with activity is observed. The majority of patients used some medication to treat headache, the one perceived as the most effective being acetylsalicylic acid.