Ventilation and filtration strategies to reduce respiratory infections in schools: a scoping review.

IF 5.2 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEWS Pub Date : 2026-07-16 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.3389/phrs.2026.1608923
Elisabetta Erriu, Jennifer Hasselgard-Rowe, Elsa Gaillard, Antoine Flahault
{"title":"Ventilation and filtration strategies to reduce respiratory infections in schools: a scoping review.","authors":"Elisabetta Erriu, Jennifer Hasselgard-Rowe, Elsa Gaillard, Antoine Flahault","doi":"10.3389/phrs.2026.1608923","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This scoping review examines evidence on ventilation and filtration strategies in schools and their association with respiratory infection incidence and proxy indicators such as CO2, particulate levels, and absenteeism.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science (19 March 2025) for studies published between 2020 and 2025 in English, French, or Italian. Eligible designs included interventional, observational, and modelling studies, as well as reviews. Screening and data extraction were performed using Rayyan, and similar publications were verified with LiteRev.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-two studies met inclusion criteria. Mechanical ventilation, especially with high-efficiency filtration, was associated with lower CO2, fewer airborne particles, and reduced infection incidence or absenteeism. Natural ventilation showed variable effectiveness influenced by climate and window use. Hybrid systems and multilayered approaches provided the greatest reductions in estimated infection risk.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Ventilation and filtration strategies reduce respiratory infection risk in schools. Mechanical and hybrid systems perform more reliably than natural ventilation. Further research should address feasibility, safety, sustainability, and implementation in low-resource settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":35944,"journal":{"name":"PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEWS","volume":"47 ","pages":"1608923"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13454833/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEWS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/phrs.2026.1608923","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This scoping review examines evidence on ventilation and filtration strategies in schools and their association with respiratory infection incidence and proxy indicators such as CO2, particulate levels, and absenteeism.

Methods: Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science (19 March 2025) for studies published between 2020 and 2025 in English, French, or Italian. Eligible designs included interventional, observational, and modelling studies, as well as reviews. Screening and data extraction were performed using Rayyan, and similar publications were verified with LiteRev.

Results: Sixty-two studies met inclusion criteria. Mechanical ventilation, especially with high-efficiency filtration, was associated with lower CO2, fewer airborne particles, and reduced infection incidence or absenteeism. Natural ventilation showed variable effectiveness influenced by climate and window use. Hybrid systems and multilayered approaches provided the greatest reductions in estimated infection risk.

Conclusion: Ventilation and filtration strategies reduce respiratory infection risk in schools. Mechanical and hybrid systems perform more reliably than natural ventilation. Further research should address feasibility, safety, sustainability, and implementation in low-resource settings.

减少学校呼吸道感染的通风和过滤策略:范围审查。
目的:本综述研究了学校通风和过滤策略的证据,以及它们与呼吸道感染发病率和代理指标(如二氧化碳、颗粒物水平和缺勤率)的关系。方法:根据PRISMA-ScR指南,我们检索了PubMed、Embase和Web of Science(2025年3月19日),检索了2020年至2025年间以英语、法语或意大利语发表的研究。符合条件的设计包括干预性、观察性和模型研究,以及综述。使用Rayyan进行筛选和数据提取,并使用litev验证类似的出版物。结果:62项研究符合纳入标准。机械通气,特别是具有高效过滤的机械通气,与较低的二氧化碳,更少的空气传播颗粒,降低感染发生率或缺勤率有关。自然通风的效果受气候和窗户使用的影响而变化。混合系统和多层方法最大程度地降低了估计感染风险。结论:通风和过滤策略降低了学校呼吸道感染的风险。机械和混合系统比自然通风更可靠。进一步的研究应解决可行性、安全性、可持续性和在低资源环境下的实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEWS
PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEWS Nursing-Community and Home Care
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
1.80%
发文量
47
审稿时长
5 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书