z-logo
Premium
The effect of an air purifier on aerosol generation measurements during clinical motility testing
Author(s) -
Verbeure Wout,
Geeraerts Annelies,
Huang IHsuan,
Timmermans Lien,
Tóth Joran,
Geysen Hannelore,
Cools Louise,
Carbone Florencia,
Schol Jolien,
Devriese Herman,
Haesaerts Rico,
Mori Hideki,
Vanuytsel Tim,
Tack Jan
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
neurogastroenterology and motility
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.489
H-Index - 105
eISSN - 1365-2982
pISSN - 1350-1925
DOI - 10.1111/nmo.14227
Subject(s) - aerosol , air purifier , medicine , catheter , particle counter , air filter , contamination , particle (ecology) , filtration (mathematics) , surgery , chromatography , nuclear medicine , biomedical engineering , chemistry , mathematics , mechanical engineering , ecology , oceanography , statistics , organic chemistry , engineering , inlet , biology , geology
Background Aerosol spread is key to interpret the risk of viral contamination during clinical procedures such as esophageal high‐resolution manometry (HRM). Installing an air purifier seems a legitimate strategy, but this has recently been questioned. Methods Patients undergoing an HRM procedure at the Leuven University Hospital were included in this clinical study. All subjects had to wear a surgical mask which was only lowered beneath the nose during the placement and removal of the nasogastric catheter. The number of aerosol particles was measured by a Lasair ® II Particle Counter to obtain data about different particles sizes: 0.3; 0.5; 1.0; 3.0; 5.0; and 10.0 µm. Measurements were done immediately before the placement and the removal of the HRM catheter, and one and 5 min after. A portable air purifier with high‐efficiency particle air filters was installed in the hospital room. Key Results Thirteen patients underwent a manometry examination. The amount of 0.3 µm‐sized particles was unaffected during the whole procedure. The larger particle sizes (1.0; 3.0; 5.0; and 10.0 µm) decreased when the catheter was positioned, but not 0.5 µm. During the HRM measurements itself, these numbers decreased further. Yet, 1 min after catheter removal a significant elevation of particles was seen, which did not recover within 5 min. Conclusions & Interferences Based on this study, there is no evidence that filtration systems reduce aerosol particles properly during a clinical investigation.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom