tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Indoor Air. 2017 Dec 15. doi: 10.1111/ina.12445. [Epub ahead of print]
[h=1]Routes of transmission of influenza A H1N1, SARS CoV and norovirus in air cabin: Comparative analyses.[/h] Lei H[SUP]1[/SUP], Li Y[SUP]1[/SUP], Xiao S[SUP]1[/SUP], Lin CH[SUP]2[/SUP], Norris SL[SUP]2[/SUP], Wei D[SUP]2[/SUP], Hu Z[SUP]3[/SUP], Ji S[SUP]3[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]
[h=3]Abstract[/h] Identifying the exact transmission route(s) of infectious diseases in indoor environments is a crucial step in developing effective intervention strategies. In this study, we proposed a comparative analysis approach and built a model to simulate outbreaks of three different inflight infections in a similar cabin environment, i.e., influenza A H1N1, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus (CoV), and norovirus. The simulation results seemed to suggest that the close contact route was probably the most significant route (contributes 70%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 67%-72%) in the inflight transmission of influenza A H1N1 transmission; as a result, passengers within two rows of the index case had a significantly higher infection risk than others in the outbreak (relative risk (RR): 13.4, 95% CI: 1.5-121.2, P=0.019). For SARS CoV, the airborne, close contact and fomite routes contributed 21% (95% CI: 19%-23%), 29% (95% CI: 27%-31%), and 50% (95% CI: 48%-53%) respectively. For norovirus, the simulation results suggested that the fomite route played the dominant role (contributes 85%, 95% CI: 83%-87%) in most cases; as a result, passengers in aisle seats had a significantly higher infection risk than others (RR: 9.5, 95% CI: 1.2-77.4, P=0.022). This work highlighted a method for using observed outbreak data to analyze the roles of different infection transmission routes. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] air cabin ; inflight infection ; intervention ; mathematical model ; multi-route transmission ; outbreak
PMID: 29244221 DOI: 10.1111/ina.12445
[h=1]Routes of transmission of influenza A H1N1, SARS CoV and norovirus in air cabin: Comparative analyses.[/h] Lei H[SUP]1[/SUP], Li Y[SUP]1[/SUP], Xiao S[SUP]1[/SUP], Lin CH[SUP]2[/SUP], Norris SL[SUP]2[/SUP], Wei D[SUP]2[/SUP], Hu Z[SUP]3[/SUP], Ji S[SUP]3[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]
[h=3]Abstract[/h] Identifying the exact transmission route(s) of infectious diseases in indoor environments is a crucial step in developing effective intervention strategies. In this study, we proposed a comparative analysis approach and built a model to simulate outbreaks of three different inflight infections in a similar cabin environment, i.e., influenza A H1N1, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus (CoV), and norovirus. The simulation results seemed to suggest that the close contact route was probably the most significant route (contributes 70%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 67%-72%) in the inflight transmission of influenza A H1N1 transmission; as a result, passengers within two rows of the index case had a significantly higher infection risk than others in the outbreak (relative risk (RR): 13.4, 95% CI: 1.5-121.2, P=0.019). For SARS CoV, the airborne, close contact and fomite routes contributed 21% (95% CI: 19%-23%), 29% (95% CI: 27%-31%), and 50% (95% CI: 48%-53%) respectively. For norovirus, the simulation results suggested that the fomite route played the dominant role (contributes 85%, 95% CI: 83%-87%) in most cases; as a result, passengers in aisle seats had a significantly higher infection risk than others (RR: 9.5, 95% CI: 1.2-77.4, P=0.022). This work highlighted a method for using observed outbreak data to analyze the roles of different infection transmission routes. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] air cabin ; inflight infection ; intervention ; mathematical model ; multi-route transmission ; outbreak
PMID: 29244221 DOI: 10.1111/ina.12445