2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2020.106338
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessing the risk of COVID-19 from multiple pathways of exposure to SARS-CoV-2: Modeling in health-care settings and effectiveness of nonpharmaceutical interventions

Abstract: Highlights A COVID-19 infection risk model from multiple exposure pathways was developed. The effectiveness of personal protective equipment in a health-care worker was evaluated. Droplet spraying was the major infection pathway, contributing to 60%–86% of cases. Hand contact via contaminated surfaces contributed to 9%–32% of cases of infection. Personal protective equipment decreased the infection risk by 63%–>99.9%.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
58
2

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 68 publications
2
58
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Similarly, comparable fomite-mediated risks on the order of 1 in 10,000 were reported by Pitol & Julian (2021) and Harvey et al (2021) associated with contacting community fomites (playgrounds, crosswalk buttons etc.). In contrast, higher relative risks associated with SARS-CoV-2 fomite transmission (range: 2 × 10 −2 – 3.2 × 10 −1 infection risks) were reported in modeling studies of child daycare centers ( Kraay et al, 2021 ) and hospitals ( Jones, 2020 ; Mizukoshi et al, 2021 ). SARS-CoV-2 bioburden on environment-specific fomites ( Wilson et al, 2021 ) and fomite-specific contact frequencies likely explain these differences in risk estimates.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…Similarly, comparable fomite-mediated risks on the order of 1 in 10,000 were reported by Pitol & Julian (2021) and Harvey et al (2021) associated with contacting community fomites (playgrounds, crosswalk buttons etc.). In contrast, higher relative risks associated with SARS-CoV-2 fomite transmission (range: 2 × 10 −2 – 3.2 × 10 −1 infection risks) were reported in modeling studies of child daycare centers ( Kraay et al, 2021 ) and hospitals ( Jones, 2020 ; Mizukoshi et al, 2021 ). SARS-CoV-2 bioburden on environment-specific fomites ( Wilson et al, 2021 ) and fomite-specific contact frequencies likely explain these differences in risk estimates.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…Having the patient wear a mask or face shield does reportedly make it possible to curb the risk of infection effectively, but this approach would not be feasible in dental therapy. In simulations, combining face masks and face shields reportedly provides 63% to >99.9% protection against infection in medical practice [30]. Therefore, using personal protective equipment such as masks, face shields, or aprons, is important for preventing infections [11,31,32].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Environmental disinfection and hand washing Contact transmission from surface of rooms and belongings is a cause of infection when the virus concentration in the saliva is high. Therefore, environmental disinfection is an important intervention to reduce viral exposure [33]. In contrast to norovirus, a special environmental decontamination or strong disinfectant is not needed to inactivate SARS-CoV-2 [34].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%