Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in air and on surfaces in rooms of infected nursing home residents

Abstract

There is an ongoing debate on airborne transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) as a risk factor for infection. In this study, the level of SARS-CoV-2 in air and on surfaces of SARS-CoV-2 infected nursing home residents was assessed to gain insight in potential transmission routes. During outbreaks, air samples were collected using three different active and one passive air sampling technique in rooms of infected patients. Oropharyngeal swabs (OPS) of the residents and dry surface swabs were collected. Additionally, longitudinal passive air samples were collected during a period of 4 months in common areas of the wards. Presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA was determined using RT-qPCR, targeting the RdRp- and E-genes. OPS, samples of two active air samplers and surface swabs with Ct value ≤35 were tested for the presence of infectious virus by cell culture. In total, 360 air and 319 surface samples from patient rooms and common areas were collected. In rooms of 10 residents with detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA in OPS, SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 93 of 184 collected environmental samples (50.5%) (lowest Ct 29,5), substantially more than in the rooms of residents with negative OPS on the day of environmental sampling (n=2) (3.6%). SARS-CoV-2 RNA was most frequently present in the larger particle size fractions (>4 μm 60% (6/10); 1-4 μm 50% (5/10); <1 μm 20% (2/10)) (Fischer exact test p=0.076). The highest proportion of RNA-positive air samples on room level was found with a filtration-based sampler 80% (8/10) and the cyclone-based sampler 70% (7/10), and impingement-based sampler 50% (5/10). SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in ten out of twelve (83%) passive air samples in patient rooms. Both high-touch and low-touch surfaces contained SARS-CoV-2 genome in rooms of residents with positive OPS (high 38% (21/55); low 50% (22/44)). In one active air sample, infectious virus in vitro was detected. In conclusion, SARS-CoV-2 is frequently detected in air and on surfaces in the immediate surroundings of room-isolated COVID-19 patients, providing evidence of environmental contamination. The environmental contamination of SARS-CoV-2 and infectious aerosols confirm the potential for transmission via air up to several meters. Keywords: SARS-CoV-2, nursing home, air levels, surface

SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in secondary school settings in the Netherlands during fall 2020; silent circulation

“…This is in contrast with findings from previous outbreak investigations conducted at mink farms and nursing homes, where similar sampling technologies were applied [1,22]. In these studies, several air samples collected in COVID-19 infected mink farms, and a high percentage of both air and surface swab samples collected in rooms in nursing homes with SARS-CoV-2 positive patients [1,22]. A previous study in London also found limited evidence of SARS-CoV-2 contamination in school environments [18].…”

“…Although we found evidence of SARS-CoV-2 transmission within secondary schools, the lack of detectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA in collected air and surface samples suggests that major environmental contamination is uncommon in schools under the prevailing conditions at the time of the study. This is in contrast with findings from previous outbreak investigations conducted at mink farms and nursing homes, where similar sampling technologies were applied [1,22]. In these studies, several air samples collected in COVID-19 infected mink farms, and a high percentage of both air and surface swab samples collected in rooms in nursing homes with SARS-CoV-2 positive patients [1,22].…”

“…Moreover, most infected students and teachers were asymptomatic or pauci-symptomatic which is known to be associated with lower infectiousness [23]. Lastly, SARS-CoV-2 spread and transmission is suggested to be a more local phenomenon, suggesting direct droplet contact and/or close range aerosol (up to several meters) as the dominant route of transmission in the school environment [22,24].…”

Disinfection and decontamination in the context of SARS‐CoV‐2‐specific data

“…Although early studies at times proposed that SARS‐CoV‐2 was sparsely found in the patient environment, the ubiquity of the environmental presence of the virus in contiguity to the infected patient soon became more obvious 1 . There has been a plethora of investigations since that corroborate the common environmental presence at least of viral RNA 19–36 . These positive determinations have included caregiver garments and accessories.…”

“…Paper, coins, and banknote materials also allow virus survival 46–49 . It is conceivable that inactive virus RNA may remain on surfaces for many days, thus jeopardizing the understanding of infectivity 28,37,50 . Virus strain variants may not differ in survival on some surfaces 51 .…”