Comparison of breath-guards and face-masks on droplet spread in eye clinics.
Comparison of breath-guards and face-masks on droplet spread in eye clinics.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1038/s41433-022-02308-8
复制
发表时间：
2023-07
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
COVID-19 影响了眼科护理服务，许多单位关闭，几位眼科医生感染了 COVID-19。了解临床和培训环境中的飞沫传播对于保持生产力、同时保证患者和从业人员的安全至关重要。我们的目的是评估呼吸防护装置和面罩在减少眼科诊所内飞沫传播方面的有效性。我们使用基于荧光素的咳嗽模型进行了飞沫传播的随机试验，以评估“呼吸防护罩”和“面罩”防止飞沫传播的功效。 “咳嗽”喷雾被收集在校准的纸目标上。这些纸张是在蓝光下拍摄的，相机上装有橙色滤镜；斑点的位置和大小是用最初为天文学开发的软件测量的。我们进行了 44 次随机咳嗽； 22 个控制装置没有呼吸防护装置或面罩，11 个仅使用呼吸防护装置，11 个控制装置结合了呼吸防护装置和面罩。我们比较了检测到的液滴数量和纸张目标上的液滴面积。对照组的平均飞沫数为 19,430 (SE 2691)，呼吸防护组为 80 (SE 19) 飞沫 (P < 0.001)；在组合组中，计数为 5 (SE 2)，与仅屏蔽相比显着下降 (P = 0.008)。每组斑点覆盖的每个目标的平均面积分别为 5.7 ± 0.857% (95% CI)、0.004 ± 0.000104% (95% CI) 和 0.001±0.0000627% (95% CI)。这些结果表明，仅使用呼吸防护装置就可以将飞沫数量减少 99.93%。将呼吸防护罩与面罩结合使用可减少 99.98% 以上的飞沫数量。呼吸防护罩在诊所中广泛使用，这项试验表明，带有面罩的呼吸防护罩可以有效阻挡飞沫喷雾。
COVID-19 has impacted ophthalmic care delivery, with many units closed and several ophthalmologists catching COVID-19. Understanding droplet spread in clinical and training settings is paramount in maintaining productivity, while keeping patients and practitioners safe. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of a breath-guard and a face mask in reducing droplet spread within an eye clinic. We performed a randomised trial of droplet spread using a fluorescein-based cough model to assess the efficacy of a ‘breath-guard’ and ‘face-mask’ to prevent the spread of droplets. The ‘cough’ spray was collected on calibrated paper targets. The sheets were photographed under blue light, with an orange filter on the camera; the position and size of the spots was measured with software originally developed for astronomy. We performed 44 randomised coughs; 22 controls with no breath-guard or face-mask, 11 using breath-guard only and 11 with combined breath-guard and face-mask. We compared both the number of droplets detected and the area of drops on paper targets. The average number of droplets in the controls was 19,430 (SE 2691), the breath-guard group 80 (SE 19) droplets (P < 0.001); in the combined In the group the count was 5 (SE 2), a significant drop from shield only (P = 0.008). The mean areas of each target covered by spots for each group were 5.7 ± 0.857% (95% CI), 0.004 ± 0.000104% (95% CI) and 0.001 ± 0.0000627% (95% CI) respectively. These results show that the breath-guard alone reduced the droplet count by 99.93%. Combining the breath-guard with a face-mask reduced the droplet count by over 99.98%. Breath-guards are widely used in clinics and this trial demonstrates that breath-guards with face-masks effectively block droplet spray.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
56.3
作者：
Belser, Jessica A.;Lash, R. Ryan;Maines, Taronna R.
通讯作者：
Maines, Taronna R.
影响因子：
3.3
作者：
Sadhu, Soumen;Agrawal, Rupesh;Biswas, Jyotirmay
通讯作者：
Biswas, Jyotirmay
影响因子：
18.2
作者：
Walker JS;Archer J;Gregson FKA;Michel SES;Bzdek BR;Reid JP
通讯作者：
Reid JP
影响因子：
2
作者：
Romano, Mario R.;Montericcio, Alessio;Romano, Vito
通讯作者：
Romano, Vito
影响因子：
4.2
作者：
Xie, Hua-Tao;Jiang, Shi-Yun;Zhang, Ming-Chang
通讯作者：
Zhang, Ming-Chang