Pilot Evaluation of Possible Airborne Transmission in a Geriatric Care Facility Using Carbon Dioxide Tracer Gas: Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Although several COVID-19 outbreaks have occurred in older adult care facilities throughout Japan, no field studies focusing on airborne infections within these settings have been reported. Countermeasures against airborne infection not only consider the air change rate (ACR) in a room but also the airflow in and between rooms. However, a specific method has not yet been established by Japanese public health centers or infectious disease–related organizations. Objective In April 2021, 59 COVID-19 cases were reported in an older adult care facility in Miyagi, Japan, and airborne transmission was suspected. The objective of this study was to simultaneously reproduce the ACR and aerosol advection in this facility using the carbon dioxide (CO2) tracer gas method to elucidate the specific location and cause of the outbreak. These findings will guide our recommendations to the facility to prevent recurrence. Methods In August 2021, CO2 sensors were placed in 5 rooms where airborne infection was suspected, and the CO2 concentration was intentionally increased using dry ice, which was subsequently removed. The ACR was then estimated by applying the Seidel equation to the time-series changes in the CO2 concentration due to ventilation. By installing multiple sensors outside the room, advection outside the room was monitored simultaneously. Aerosol advection was verified using computer simulations. Although the windows were closed at the time of the outbreak, we conducted experiments under open-window conditions to quantify the effects of window opening. Results The ACR values at the time of the outbreak were estimated to be 2.0 to 6.8 h−1 in the rooms of the facility. A low-cost intervention of opening windows improved the ventilation frequency by a factor of 2.2 to 5.7. Ventilation depended significantly on the window-opening conditions (P values ranging from .001 to .03 for all rooms). Aerosol advection was detected from the private room to the day room in agreement with the simulation results. Considering that the individual who initiated the infection was in the private room on the day of infection, and several residents, who later became secondarily infected, were gathered in the day room, it was postulated that the infectious aerosol was transmitted by this air current. Conclusions The present results suggest that secondary infections can occur owing to aerosol advection driven by large-scale flow, even when the building design adheres to the ventilation guidelines established in Japan. Moreover, the CO2 tracer gas method facilitates the visualization of areas at a high risk of airborne infection and demonstrates the effectiveness of window opening, which contributes to improved facility operations and recurrence prevention.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".