Assessment of dispersion of airborne particles of oral/nasal fluid by high flow nasal cannula therapy
View/ Open
Issue Date
2021-02-12Author
Jermy, M. C.
Spence, C. J. T.
Kirton, R.
O’Donnell, J. F.
Kabaliuk, N.
Gaw, S.
Hockey, H.
Jiang, Y.
Zulkhairi Abidin, Z.
Dougherty, R. L.
Rowe, P.
Mahaliyana, A. S.
Gibbs, A.
Roberts, S. A.
Publisher
Public Library of Science
Type
Article
Article Version
Scholarly/refereed, publisher version
Rights
© 2021 Jermy et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License.
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Background
Nasal High Flow (NHF) therapy delivers flows of heated humidified gases up to 60 LPM (litres per minute) via a nasal cannula. Particles of oral/nasal fluid released by patients undergoing NHF therapy may pose a cross-infection risk, which is a potential concern for treating COVID-19 patients.Methods
Liquid particles within the exhaled breath of healthy participants were measured with two protocols: (1) high speed camera imaging and counting exhaled particles under high magnification (6 participants) and (2) measuring the deposition of a chemical marker (riboflavin-5-monophosphate) at a distance of 100 and 500 mm on filter papers through which air was drawn (10 participants). The filter papers were assayed with HPLC. Breathing conditions tested included quiet (resting) breathing and vigorous breathing (which here means nasal snorting, voluntary coughing and voluntary sneezing). Unsupported (natural) breathing and NHF at 30 and 60 LPM were compared.Results
Imaging: During quiet breathing, no particles were recorded with unsupported breathing or 30 LPM NHF (detection limit for single particles 33 μm). Particles were detected from 2 of 6 participants at 60 LPM quiet breathing at approximately 10% of the rate caused by unsupported vigorous breathing. Unsupported vigorous breathing released the greatest numbers of particles. Vigorous breathing with NHF at 60 LPM, released half the number of particles compared to vigorous breathing without NHF.
Chemical marker tests: No oral/nasal fluid was detected in quiet breathing without NHF (detection limit 0.28 μL/m3). In quiet breathing with NHF at 60 LPM, small quantities were detected in 4 out of 29 quiet breathing tests, not exceeding 17 μL/m3. Vigorous breathing released 200–1000 times more fluid than the quiet breathing with NHF. The quantities detected in vigorous breathing were similar whether using NHF or not.Conclusion
During quiet breathing, 60 LPM NHF therapy may cause oral/nasal fluid to be released as particles, at levels of tens of μL per cubic metre of air. Vigorous breathing (snort, cough or sneeze) releases 200 to 1000 times more oral/nasal fluid than quiet breathing (p < 0.001 with both imaging and chemical marker methods). During vigorous breathing, 60 LPM NHF therapy caused no statistically significant difference in the quantity of oral/nasal fluid released compared to unsupported breathing. NHF use does not increase the risk of dispersing infectious aerosols above the risk of unsupported vigorous breathing. Standard infection prevention and control measures should apply when dealing with a patient who has an acute respiratory infection, independent of which, if any, respiratory support is being used.
Collections
Citation
Jermy MC, Spence CJT, Kirton R, O’Donnell JF, Kabaliuk N, Gaw S, et al. (2021) Assessment of dispersion of airborne particles of oral/nasal fluid by high flow nasal cannula therapy. PLoS ONE 16(2): e0246123. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246123
Items in KU ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
We want to hear from you! Please share your stories about how Open Access to this item benefits YOU.