American journal of infection control · 2021
Vapourized hydrogen peroxide decontamination in a hospital setting inactivates SARS-CoV-2 and HCoV-229E without compromising filtration efficiency of unexpired N95 respirators.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Christie-Holmes Natasha, Tyli Rachel, Budylowski Patrick, Guvenc Furkan, Weiner Amit, Poon Betty, Speck Mary, Naugler Stephenie, Rainville Allen, Ghalami Ayoob, McCaw Shannon, Hayes Steven, Mubareka Samira, Gray-Owen Scott D, Rotstein Ori D, Kandel Rita A, Scott James A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for evidence-based approaches to decontamination and reuse of N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs). We sought to determine whether vapourized hydrogen peroxide (VHP) reduced SARS-CoV-2 bioburden on FFRs without compromising filtration efficiency. We also investigated coronavirus HCoV-229E as a surrogate for decontamination validation testing.
METHODS: N95 FFRs were laced with SARS-CoV-2 or HCoV-229E and treated with VHP in a hospital reprocessing facility. After sterilization, viral burden was determined using viral outgrowth in a titration assay, and filtration efficiency of FFRs was tested against ATSM F2299 and NIOSH TEB-STP-APR-0059.
RESULTS: Viable SARS-CoV-2 virus was not detected after VHP treatment. One replicate of the HCoV-229E laced FFRs yielded virus after processing. Unexpired N95 FFRs retained full filtration efficiency after VHP processing. Expired FFRs failed to meet design-specified filtration efficiency and therefore are unsuitable for reprocessing.
DISCUSSION: In-hospital VHP is an effective decontaminant for SARS-CoV-2 on FFRs. Further, filtration efficiency of unexpired respirators is not affected by this decontamination process.
CONCLUSIONS: VHP is effective in inactivating SARS-CoV-2 on FFRs without compromising filtration efficiency. HCoV-229E is a suitable surrogate for SARS-CoV-2 for disinfection studies.
METHODS: N95 FFRs were laced with SARS-CoV-2 or HCoV-229E and treated with VHP in a hospital reprocessing facility. After sterilization, viral burden was determined using viral outgrowth in a titration assay, and filtration efficiency of FFRs was tested against ATSM F2299 and NIOSH TEB-STP-APR-0059.
RESULTS: Viable SARS-CoV-2 virus was not detected after VHP treatment. One replicate of the HCoV-229E laced FFRs yielded virus after processing. Unexpired N95 FFRs retained full filtration efficiency after VHP processing. Expired FFRs failed to meet design-specified filtration efficiency and therefore are unsuitable for reprocessing.
DISCUSSION: In-hospital VHP is an effective decontaminant for SARS-CoV-2 on FFRs. Further, filtration efficiency of unexpired respirators is not affected by this decontamination process.
CONCLUSIONS: VHP is effective in inactivating SARS-CoV-2 on FFRs without compromising filtration efficiency. HCoV-229E is a suitable surrogate for SARS-CoV-2 for disinfection studies.