Environmental biocontamination by SARS-CoV-2 Virus in the hospital setting

IF 4.8 Q1 MICROBIOLOGY

Current Research in Microbial Sciences Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.crmicr.2025.100355

M Espejo Mambié , D San Jose-Saras , C Bischofberger Valdés , C Díaz-Agero Pérez , JC Galán Montemayor , L Martínez-García , M Abreu Di-Berardino , P Moreno-Nunez , J Vicente-Guijarro , J.M Aranaz-Andrés

{"title":"Environmental biocontamination by SARS-CoV-2 Virus in the hospital setting","authors":"M Espejo Mambié , D San Jose-Saras , C Bischofberger Valdés , C Díaz-Agero Pérez , JC Galán Montemayor , L Martínez-García , M Abreu Di-Berardino , P Moreno-Nunez , J Vicente-Guijarro , J.M Aranaz-Andrés","doi":"10.1016/j.crmicr.2025.100355","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Demonstrating the capability to isolate biological material from the environment was fundamental to supporting any transmission route. Various and inconsistent methodologies have been used to address this issue; however, the debate in scientific societies about the possibility of airborne transmission as a source of SARS-CoV-2 spread remained open.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To analyze SARS-CoV-2 contamination in the air and on surfaces in a hospital setting during the COVID-19 pandemic.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This study involved air and surface sampling in the emergency, hospitalization, and intensive care unit areas of the Ramón y Cajal University Hospital. A consistent methodology was used for all samples, and clinical and environmental parameters and characterization of each location were recorded.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 234 samples were collected, comprising 160 surface samples and 74 air samples, of which 6.84 % tested positive (13/160 surface samples and 3/74 air samples). High-contact surfaces had the highest proportion of positive samples (12/13). All positive air samples were identified within 2 m of patients who had recently developed symptoms (<5 days). High dependency and elevated temperatures seemed to indicate a higher risk of environmental biocontamination. Additionally, there was a higher risk of contamination in the intensive care units than in the hospitalization or emergency units.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34305,"journal":{"name":"Current Research in Microbial Sciences","volume":"8 ","pages":"Article 100355"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Research in Microbial Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666517425000173","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Demonstrating the capability to isolate biological material from the environment was fundamental to supporting any transmission route. Various and inconsistent methodologies have been used to address this issue; however, the debate in scientific societies about the possibility of airborne transmission as a source of SARS-CoV-2 spread remained open.

Objective

To analyze SARS-CoV-2 contamination in the air and on surfaces in a hospital setting during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

This study involved air and surface sampling in the emergency, hospitalization, and intensive care unit areas of the Ramón y Cajal University Hospital. A consistent methodology was used for all samples, and clinical and environmental parameters and characterization of each location were recorded.

Results

A total of 234 samples were collected, comprising 160 surface samples and 74 air samples, of which 6.84 % tested positive (13/160 surface samples and 3/74 air samples). High-contact surfaces had the highest proportion of positive samples (12/13). All positive air samples were identified within 2 m of patients who had recently developed symptoms (<5 days). High dependency and elevated temperatures seemed to indicate a higher risk of environmental biocontamination. Additionally, there was a higher risk of contamination in the intensive care units than in the hospitalization or emergency units.

Abstract Image