多少自然通风率可以抑制 COVID-19 在居住区的传播?

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Journal of Research in Medical Sciences Pub Date : 2024-02-23 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.4103/jrms.jrms_796_22
Amir Nejatian, Faranak Ebrahimian Sadabad, Farshad M Shirazi, Seyed Faraz Nejati, Samaneh Nakhaee, Omid Mehrpour
{"title":"多少自然通风率可以抑制 COVID-19 在居住区的传播?","authors":"Amir Nejatian, Faranak Ebrahimian Sadabad, Farshad M Shirazi, Seyed Faraz Nejati, Samaneh Nakhaee, Omid Mehrpour","doi":"10.4103/jrms.jrms_796_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Previous research has emphasized the importance of efficient ventilation in suppressing COVID-19 transmission in indoor spaces, yet suitable ventilation rates have not been suggested.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study investigated the impacts of mechanical, natural, single-sided, cross-ventilation, and three mask types (homemade, surgical, N95) on COVID-19 spread across eight common indoor settings. Viral exposure was quantified using a mass balance calculation of inhaled viral particles, accounting for initial viral load, removal via ventilation, and mask filtration efficiency.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results demonstrated that natural cross-ventilation significantly reduced viral load, decreasing from 10,000 to 0 viruses over 15 minutes in a 100 m2 space by providing ~1325 m3/h of outdoor air via two 0.6 m2 openings at 1.5 m/s wind speed. In contrast, single-sided ventilation only halved viral load at best.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Natural cross-ventilation with masks effectively suppressed airborne viruses, lowering potential infections and disease transmission. The study recommends suitable ventilation rates to reduce COVID-19 infection risks in indoor spaces.</p>","PeriodicalId":50062,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10953753/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How much natural ventilation rate can suppress COVID-19 transmission in occupancy zones?\",\"authors\":\"Amir Nejatian, Faranak Ebrahimian Sadabad, Farshad M Shirazi, Seyed Faraz Nejati, Samaneh Nakhaee, Omid Mehrpour\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jrms.jrms_796_22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Previous research has emphasized the importance of efficient ventilation in suppressing COVID-19 transmission in indoor spaces, yet suitable ventilation rates have not been suggested.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study investigated the impacts of mechanical, natural, single-sided, cross-ventilation, and three mask types (homemade, surgical, N95) on COVID-19 spread across eight common indoor settings. Viral exposure was quantified using a mass balance calculation of inhaled viral particles, accounting for initial viral load, removal via ventilation, and mask filtration efficiency.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results demonstrated that natural cross-ventilation significantly reduced viral load, decreasing from 10,000 to 0 viruses over 15 minutes in a 100 m2 space by providing ~1325 m3/h of outdoor air via two 0.6 m2 openings at 1.5 m/s wind speed. In contrast, single-sided ventilation only halved viral load at best.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Natural cross-ventilation with masks effectively suppressed airborne viruses, lowering potential infections and disease transmission. The study recommends suitable ventilation rates to reduce COVID-19 infection risks in indoor spaces.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50062,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10953753/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jrms.jrms_796_22\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jrms.jrms_796_22","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:以往的研究强调了有效通风对抑制 COVID-19 在室内空间传播的重要性,但尚未提出合适的通风率:本研究调查了机械通风、自然通风、单侧通风、交叉通风以及三种口罩类型(自制口罩、外科口罩、N95口罩)对八种常见室内环境中 COVID-19 传播的影响。使用吸入病毒颗粒的质量平衡计算方法对病毒暴露进行量化,同时考虑初始病毒载量、通风清除量和口罩过滤效率:结果表明,在风速为 1.5 米/秒的条件下,通过两个 0.6 平方米的开口,每小时可提供约 1325 立方米的室外空气,自然交叉通风可显著降低病毒载量,在 100 平方米的空间内,15 分钟内病毒载量从 10,000 个降至 0 个。相比之下,单侧通风最多只能将病毒量减半:结论:戴口罩的自然交叉通风可有效抑制空气中的病毒,降低潜在的感染和疾病传播。研究建议采用合适的通风率来降低 COVID-19 在室内空间的感染风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How much natural ventilation rate can suppress COVID-19 transmission in occupancy zones?

Background: Previous research has emphasized the importance of efficient ventilation in suppressing COVID-19 transmission in indoor spaces, yet suitable ventilation rates have not been suggested.

Materials and methods: This study investigated the impacts of mechanical, natural, single-sided, cross-ventilation, and three mask types (homemade, surgical, N95) on COVID-19 spread across eight common indoor settings. Viral exposure was quantified using a mass balance calculation of inhaled viral particles, accounting for initial viral load, removal via ventilation, and mask filtration efficiency.

Results: Results demonstrated that natural cross-ventilation significantly reduced viral load, decreasing from 10,000 to 0 viruses over 15 minutes in a 100 m2 space by providing ~1325 m3/h of outdoor air via two 0.6 m2 openings at 1.5 m/s wind speed. In contrast, single-sided ventilation only halved viral load at best.

Conclusion: Natural cross-ventilation with masks effectively suppressed airborne viruses, lowering potential infections and disease transmission. The study recommends suitable ventilation rates to reduce COVID-19 infection risks in indoor spaces.

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
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
6.20%
发文量
75
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, a publication of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, is a peer-reviewed online continuous journal with print on demand compilation of issues published. The journal’s full text is available online at http://www.jmsjournal.net. The journal allows free access (Open Access) to its contents and permits authors to self-archive final accepted version of the articles on any OAI-compliant institutional / subject-based repository.
期刊最新文献
Association of mammographic and sonographic findings with prognostic molecular factors and hormone receptor expression in malignant breast lesions. Association of phase angle with sarcopenia in patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis: A case-control study. Diabetic peripheral arterial disease in COVID-19 pandemic. Diagnostic value of ultrasonography in knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review. Factors associated with refusing hemoperfusion in patients with acute paraquat poisoning.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1