2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2017.11.039
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Droplet distribution and airborne bacteria in an experimental shower unit

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
16
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
1
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our study shows similarities and complementarities with 2 other recent studies from Chattopadhyay et al (Chattopadhyay et al, 2017) and Estrada-Perez et al (Estrada-Perez et al, 2018) in term of aerosol samplers, Gram-negative bacillus targets, and detection methods. Table 4 shows that the concentrations of Legionella aerosols generated by the vibrating-mesh nebulizer (8.9 x 10 3 CFU.m 3 ) or by the jet nebulizer (1.4 x 10 3 CFU.m 3 .min -1 ) in our experimental setup effectively mimic an emitted dose of shower bacteria.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our study shows similarities and complementarities with 2 other recent studies from Chattopadhyay et al (Chattopadhyay et al, 2017) and Estrada-Perez et al (Estrada-Perez et al, 2018) in term of aerosol samplers, Gram-negative bacillus targets, and detection methods. Table 4 shows that the concentrations of Legionella aerosols generated by the vibrating-mesh nebulizer (8.9 x 10 3 CFU.m 3 ) or by the jet nebulizer (1.4 x 10 3 CFU.m 3 .min -1 ) in our experimental setup effectively mimic an emitted dose of shower bacteria.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…Regarding aerosol dispersion (quantity, size), the discrepancy between the results from the different studies is due to the different methods and apparatuses used to measure the air bacteria concentration and to numerous other factors, such as ambient humidity, type of shower stall, design of the showerhead, water temperature, piping materials, human occupants or bacterial communities and biofilm development. Several publications (Chattopadhyay et al, 2017;Cowen and Ollison, 2006;Estrada-Perez et al, 2018;O'Toole et al, 2009;Perkins et al, 2009;Zhou et al, 2007) have shown that (i) a shower with the low-flow showerhead generates a significantly higher number of aerosols than a high-flow shower. (ii) A hot shower (approximately 40°C) increases the rate of evaporation; therefore, the number of small particles within the breathable range is increased, and the culturability of cells is decreased with the turn off to the VBNC state, as shown for Pseudomonas and Legionella.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite these stressors, bacterial abundances often exceed 10 6 cells cm −2 inside shower plumbing ( 1 3 ). Thus, in the act of showering, we are exposed to elevated concentrations of showerhead-associated bacteria as they are dislodged and aerosolized ( 4 6 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, virulence factors are not sufficiently characterized, there is a paradoxical dose-response relationship in connection with the internalization of Legionella by amoebae [ 1 ], and the role of aerosols formed during showering and the importance of exposure to this source in private homes are unclear [ 20 ], [ 21 ]. There are studies that deal experimentally with the formation and distribution of drops and aerosols formed during showering [ 27 ] as well as with mathematical exposure-risk models [ 28 ], [ 29 ], but due to the rather theoretical nature of the question, no pragmatic conclusions can be drawn from this. In Germany, unlike in other countries, air conditioning systems are of less importance as a reservoir in private households and thus as a source of infection.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%