Search

Two independent studies by two separate research teams (from Hong Kong and Singapore) failed to detect any influenza RNA landing on, or inhaled by, a life-like, human manikin target, after exposure to naturally influenza-infected volunteers. For the Hong Kong experiments, 9 influenza-infected volunteers were recruited to breathe, talk/count and cough, from 0.1 m and 0.5 m distance, onto a mouth-breathing manikin. Aerosolised droplets exhaled from the volunteers and entering the manikin’s mouth were collected with PTFE filters and an aerosol sampler, in separate experiments. Virus detection was performed using an in-house influenza RNA reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay. No influenza RNA was detected from any of the PTFE filters or air samples. For the Singapore experiments, 6 influenza-infected volunteers were asked to breathe (nasal/mouth breathing), talk (counting in English/second language), cough (from 1 m/0.1 m away) and laugh, onto a thermal, breathing manikin. The manikin’s face was swabbed at specific points (around both eyes, the nostrils and the mouth) before and after exposure to each of these respiratory activities, and was cleaned between each activity with medical grade alcohol swabs. Shadowgraph imaging was used to record the generation of these respiratory aerosols from the infected volunteers and their impact onto the target manikin. No influenza RNA was detected from any of these swabs with either team’s in-house diagnostic influenza assays. All the influenza-infected volunteers had diagnostic swabs taken at recruitment that confirmed influenza (A/H1, A/H3 or B) infection with high viral loads, ranging from 105-108 copies/mL (Hong Kong volunteers/assay) and 104–107 copies/mL influenza viral RNA (Singapore volunteers/assay). These findings suggest that influenza RNA may not be readily transmitted from naturally-infected human source to susceptible recipients via these natural respiratory activities, within these exposure time-frames. Various reasons are discussed in an attempt to explain these findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cough airflow dynamics have been previously studied using a variety of experimental methods. In this study, real-time, noninvasive shadowgraph imaging was applied to obtain additional analyses of cough airflows produced by healthy volunteers. Twenty healthy volunteers (10 women, mean age 32.2±12.9 years; 10 men, mean age 25.3±2.5 years) were asked to cough freely, then into their sleeves (as per current US CDC recommendations) in this study to analyze cough airflow dynamics. For the 10 females (cases 1-10), their maximum detectable cough propagation distances ranged from 0.16-0.55 m, with maximum derived velocities of 2.2-5.0 m/s, and their maximum detectable 2-D projected areas ranged from 0.010-0.11 m2, with maximum derived expansion rates of 0.15-0.55 m2/s. For the 10 males (cases 11-20), their maximum detectable cough propagation distances ranged from 0.31-0.64 m, with maximum derived velocities of 3.2-14 m/s, and their maximum detectable 2-D projected areas ranged from 0.04-0.14 m2, with maximum derived expansion rates of 0.25-1.4 m2/s. These peak velocities were measured when the visibility of the exhaled airflows was optimal and compare favorably with those reported previously using other methods, and may be seen as a validation of these previous approaches in a more natural setting. However, the propagation distances can only represent a lower limit due to the inability of the shadowgraph method to visualize these cough airflows once their temperature cools to that of the ambient air, which is an important limitation of this methodology. The qualitative high-speed video footage of these volunteers coughing into their sleeves demonstrates that although this method rarely completely blocks the cough airflow, it decelerates, splits and redirects the airflow, eventually reducing its propagation. The effectiveness of this intervention depends on optimum positioning of the arm over the nose and mouth during coughing, though unsightly stains on sleeves may make it unacceptable to some. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]