卫生保健工作者在病房接触大流行性流感的评估。

ASHRAE transactions Pub Date : 2012-01-01
U Ghia, M Gressel, S Konangi, K Mead, A Kishore, G Earnest
{"title":"卫生保健工作者在病房接触大流行性流感的评估。","authors":"U Ghia, M Gressel, S Konangi, K Mead, A Kishore, G Earnest","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study examines the effectiveness of a current Airborne Infection Isolation Room (AIIR) in protecting health-care workers (HCWs) from airborne-infection (AI) exposure, and compares HCW AI exposures within an AIIR and a traditional patient room. We numerically simulated the air-flow patterns in the rooms, using room geometries and layout (room dimensions, bathroom dimensions and details, placement of vents and furniture), ventilation parameters (flow rates at the inlet and outlet vents, diffuser design, thermal sources, etc.), and pressurization corresponding to those measured at a local hospital. A patient-cough was introduced into each simulation, and the AI dispersal was tracked in time using a multi-phase flow simulation approach. The measured data showed that ventilation rates for both rooms exceeded 12 air-changes per hour (ACH), and the AIIR was at almost 16 ACH. Thus, the AIIR met the recommended design criteria for ventilation rate and pressurization. However, the computed results revealed incomplete air mixing, and not all of the room air was changed 12 (or 16) times per hour. In fact, in some regions of the room, the air merely circulated, and did not refresh. With the main exhaust flow rate exceeding the main supply, mass flow rate conservation required a part of the deficit to be accounted for by air migration from the corridor through the gaps around the main door. Hence, the AIIR was effective in containing the \"infectious aerosol\" within the room. However, it showed increased exposure of the HCW to the AI pathogens, as the flow from the ceiling-mounted supply louver first encountered the patient and then the HCW almost directly on its way to the main exhaust, also located on the ceiling. The traditional patient room exhibited a similar flow path. In addition, for the traditional patient room, some cough-generated aerosol is observed very close to the gaps around the door to the corridor, indicating that the aerosol may escape to the corridor, and spread the infection beyond the room. The computational results suggest that ventilation arrangement can have an important role in better protecting the HCW from exposure to airborne infectious pathogens.</p>","PeriodicalId":91206,"journal":{"name":"ASHRAE transactions","volume":"118 1","pages":"442-449"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4694636/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of Health-Care Worker Exposure to Pandemic Flu in Hospital Rooms.\",\"authors\":\"U Ghia, M Gressel, S Konangi, K Mead, A Kishore, G Earnest\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study examines the effectiveness of a current Airborne Infection Isolation Room (AIIR) in protecting health-care workers (HCWs) from airborne-infection (AI) exposure, and compares HCW AI exposures within an AIIR and a traditional patient room. We numerically simulated the air-flow patterns in the rooms, using room geometries and layout (room dimensions, bathroom dimensions and details, placement of vents and furniture), ventilation parameters (flow rates at the inlet and outlet vents, diffuser design, thermal sources, etc.), and pressurization corresponding to those measured at a local hospital. A patient-cough was introduced into each simulation, and the AI dispersal was tracked in time using a multi-phase flow simulation approach. The measured data showed that ventilation rates for both rooms exceeded 12 air-changes per hour (ACH), and the AIIR was at almost 16 ACH. Thus, the AIIR met the recommended design criteria for ventilation rate and pressurization. However, the computed results revealed incomplete air mixing, and not all of the room air was changed 12 (or 16) times per hour. In fact, in some regions of the room, the air merely circulated, and did not refresh. With the main exhaust flow rate exceeding the main supply, mass flow rate conservation required a part of the deficit to be accounted for by air migration from the corridor through the gaps around the main door. Hence, the AIIR was effective in containing the \\\"infectious aerosol\\\" within the room. However, it showed increased exposure of the HCW to the AI pathogens, as the flow from the ceiling-mounted supply louver first encountered the patient and then the HCW almost directly on its way to the main exhaust, also located on the ceiling. The traditional patient room exhibited a similar flow path. In addition, for the traditional patient room, some cough-generated aerosol is observed very close to the gaps around the door to the corridor, indicating that the aerosol may escape to the corridor, and spread the infection beyond the room. The computational results suggest that ventilation arrangement can have an important role in better protecting the HCW from exposure to airborne infectious pathogens.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":91206,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ASHRAE transactions\",\"volume\":\"118 1\",\"pages\":\"442-449\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4694636/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ASHRAE transactions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ASHRAE transactions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究考察了当前空气传播感染隔离室(AIIR)在保护卫生保健工作者(HCWs)免受空气传播感染(AI)暴露方面的有效性,并比较了AIIR和传统病房内的HCW AI暴露。我们使用房间的几何形状和布局(房间尺寸、浴室尺寸和细节、通风口和家具的位置)、通风参数(进出口通风口的流速、扩散器设计、热源等),以及与当地医院测量的压力相对应的数值模拟了房间内的空气流动模式。每次模拟中引入患者咳嗽,采用多相流模拟方法及时跟踪AI扩散。测量数据显示,两个房间的通风量都超过每小时12次换气,空气量几乎达到每小时16次换气。因此,air符合通风率和压力的推荐设计标准。然而,计算结果显示空气混合不完全,并不是所有的房间空气每小时更换12(或16)次。事实上,在房间的某些地方,空气只是流通,并不新鲜。当主排气流量超过主送风流量时,质量流量守恒要求走廊通过正门周围的间隙进行空气迁移来弥补部分损失。因此,空气可以有效地将“传染性气溶胶”控制在房间内。然而,它显示了HCW接触AI病原体的增加,因为从安装在天花板上的供应百叶流出的气流首先遇到了患者,然后HCW几乎直接进入了位于天花板上的主排气口。传统的病房也呈现出类似的流动路径。此外,对于传统的病房,一些咳嗽产生的气溶胶被观察到非常靠近走廊门周围的间隙,这表明气溶胶可能会逃逸到走廊,并将感染传播到房间之外。计算结果表明,通风安排可以更好地保护HCW免受空气传播的感染性病原体的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessment of Health-Care Worker Exposure to Pandemic Flu in Hospital Rooms.

This study examines the effectiveness of a current Airborne Infection Isolation Room (AIIR) in protecting health-care workers (HCWs) from airborne-infection (AI) exposure, and compares HCW AI exposures within an AIIR and a traditional patient room. We numerically simulated the air-flow patterns in the rooms, using room geometries and layout (room dimensions, bathroom dimensions and details, placement of vents and furniture), ventilation parameters (flow rates at the inlet and outlet vents, diffuser design, thermal sources, etc.), and pressurization corresponding to those measured at a local hospital. A patient-cough was introduced into each simulation, and the AI dispersal was tracked in time using a multi-phase flow simulation approach. The measured data showed that ventilation rates for both rooms exceeded 12 air-changes per hour (ACH), and the AIIR was at almost 16 ACH. Thus, the AIIR met the recommended design criteria for ventilation rate and pressurization. However, the computed results revealed incomplete air mixing, and not all of the room air was changed 12 (or 16) times per hour. In fact, in some regions of the room, the air merely circulated, and did not refresh. With the main exhaust flow rate exceeding the main supply, mass flow rate conservation required a part of the deficit to be accounted for by air migration from the corridor through the gaps around the main door. Hence, the AIIR was effective in containing the "infectious aerosol" within the room. However, it showed increased exposure of the HCW to the AI pathogens, as the flow from the ceiling-mounted supply louver first encountered the patient and then the HCW almost directly on its way to the main exhaust, also located on the ceiling. The traditional patient room exhibited a similar flow path. In addition, for the traditional patient room, some cough-generated aerosol is observed very close to the gaps around the door to the corridor, indicating that the aerosol may escape to the corridor, and spread the infection beyond the room. The computational results suggest that ventilation arrangement can have an important role in better protecting the HCW from exposure to airborne infectious pathogens.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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