4.5 Review

Observing and quantifying airflows in the infection control of aerosol- and airborne-transmitted diseases: an overview of approaches

期刊

JOURNAL OF HOSPITAL INFECTION
卷 77, 期 3, 页码 213-222

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2010.09.037

关键词

Aerosol; Airflow; Computational fluid dynamics; Mannequin; Schlieren; Transmission

资金

  1. Singapore National Medical Research Council [NMRC/1208/2009]
  2. Senior Leverhulme Fellowship
  3. EPSRC [EP/G029768/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  4. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/G029768/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With concerns about the potential for the aerosol and airborne transmission of infectious agents, particularly influenza, more attention is being focused on the effectiveness of infection control procedures to prevent hospital-acquired infections by this route. More recently a number of different techniques have been applied to examine the temporal-spatial information about the airflow patterns and the movement of related, suspended material within this air in a hospital setting. Closer collaboration with engineers has allowed clinical micro-biologists, virologists and infection control teams to assess the effectiveness of hospital isolation and ventilation facilities. The characteristics of human respiratory activities have also been investigated using some familiar engineering techniques. Such studies aim to enhance the effectiveness of such preventive measures and have included experiments with human-like mannequins using various tracer gas/particle techniques, real human volunteers with real-time non-invasive Schlieren imaging, numerical modelling using computational fluid dynamics, and small scale physical analogues with water. This article outlines each of these techniques in a non-technical manner, suitable for a clinical readership without specialist airflow or engineering knowledge. (C) 2010 The Hospital Infection Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据