TY - JOUR
T1 - Feasibility of selected prophylactic barriers in arrestance of airborne bacterial vegetative cells and endospores
AU - Davidson, Craig S.
AU - Green, Christopher F.
AU - Gibbs, Shawn G.
AU - Panlilio, Adelisa L.
AU - Jensen, Paul A.
AU - Jin, Yan
AU - Scarpino, Pasquale V.
N1 - Funding Information:
Supported by the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) .
PY - 2011/9
Y1 - 2011/9
N2 - Background: Transmission of infection by airborne agents is a risk for health care personnel, patients, and visitors. This risk is heightened in regions without access to environmental controls and personal protective equipment. The ability of 2 prophylactic barriers (ie, semitransparent netting for insect control) to arrest bioaerosols was assessed for potential use within the malarial zones. Methods: Barriers (pore sizes of 0.8 mm and 0.25 mm) were challenged with bioaerosols of vegetative cells and endospores of Bacillus anthracis strain Sterne 34F2 using a bioaerosol chamber. Barriers were also challenged with airborne inert polystyrene latex particles of known diameters (0.1, 0.43, 0.6, 1.3, 3.2, and 8.0 μm), and the arrestance provided by barrier with the 0.25 mm pore size was expressed as a function of aerodynamic diameter of challenge aerosols. Results: Barrier with the 0.8 mm pore size provided no significant arrestance of aerosols, whereas the barrier with the 0.25 mm pore size provided an 8% arrestance of vegetative cells and a 13% arrestance of endospores. No arrestance at or below the 0.6 μm particle size was observed. Conclusion: The level of arrestance provided by these prophylactic barriers does not justify their use as a sole method of preventing transmission.
AB - Background: Transmission of infection by airborne agents is a risk for health care personnel, patients, and visitors. This risk is heightened in regions without access to environmental controls and personal protective equipment. The ability of 2 prophylactic barriers (ie, semitransparent netting for insect control) to arrest bioaerosols was assessed for potential use within the malarial zones. Methods: Barriers (pore sizes of 0.8 mm and 0.25 mm) were challenged with bioaerosols of vegetative cells and endospores of Bacillus anthracis strain Sterne 34F2 using a bioaerosol chamber. Barriers were also challenged with airborne inert polystyrene latex particles of known diameters (0.1, 0.43, 0.6, 1.3, 3.2, and 8.0 μm), and the arrestance provided by barrier with the 0.25 mm pore size was expressed as a function of aerodynamic diameter of challenge aerosols. Results: Barrier with the 0.8 mm pore size provided no significant arrestance of aerosols, whereas the barrier with the 0.25 mm pore size provided an 8% arrestance of vegetative cells and a 13% arrestance of endospores. No arrestance at or below the 0.6 μm particle size was observed. Conclusion: The level of arrestance provided by these prophylactic barriers does not justify their use as a sole method of preventing transmission.
KW - Bioaerosol
KW - insect netting
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80052030717&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80052030717&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ajic.2010.10.032
DO - 10.1016/j.ajic.2010.10.032
M3 - Article
C2 - 21570738
AN - SCOPUS:80052030717
SN - 0196-6553
VL - 39
SP - 581
EP - 586
JO - American Journal of Infection Control
JF - American Journal of Infection Control
IS - 7
ER -