SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory pathogens are detected in continuous air samples from congregate settings

Abstract

Two years after the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, there is still a need for better ways to assess the risk of transmission in congregate spaces. We deployed active air samplers to monitor the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in real-world settings across communities in the Upper Midwestern states of Wisconsin and Minnesota. Over 29 weeks, we collected 527 air samples from 15 congregate settings and detected 106 SARS-CoV-2 positive samples, demonstrating SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in air collected from daily and weekly sampling intervals. We expanded the utility of air surveillance to test for 40 other respiratory pathogens. Surveillance data revealed differences in timing and location of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza A virus detection in the community. In addition, we obtained SARS-CoV-2 genome sequences from air samples to identify variant lineages. Collectively, this shows air surveillance is a scalable, cost-effective, and high throughput alternative to individual testing for detecting respiratory pathogens in congregate settings.

Early Emergence Phase of SARS-CoV-2 Delta Variant in Florida, US

“…To overcome this major challenge to control the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic, there is a continued need for targeted viral genomic surveillance and expansion of novel surveillance tools. Two promising approaches are the use of wastewater surveillance as well as the application of air collection monitors to detect SARS-CoV-2 in the environment [58]. When deployed, these tools can be used to assess the risk of infection in a specific setting, detect the emergence of novel variants, and track viral diversity.…”

Disinfection and decontamination in the context of SARS‐CoV‐2‐specific data

“… 1 There has been a plethora of investigations since that corroborate the common environmental presence at least of viral RNA. 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 These positive determinations have included caregiver garments and accessories. Flooring is often underappreciated for contamination.…”

“… 41 Some have also suggested that in a highly endemic region for COVID‐19, widespread detection of virus may be possible for a large variety of public air and surfaces regardless of their constitution. 35 , 42 The latter study did not include an assessment for viable virus. Wastewater as a potential source or at least an indicator of disease prevalence is well studied.…”

“…Evidence for potential aerosol distribution continues to emerge, but the consensus suggests that viral particles, as measured mainly through RNA detection, do circulate in air with variable distributions, within variable sizes of air particles, and for varied distances. 2 , 20 , 22 , 24 , 26 , 28 , 30 , 32 , 33 , 35 , 37 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 Few of these studies have examined for viable virus, but for those that had, positivity was determined, although for few samples. 25 , 30 , 33 , 53 , 55 Concerns continue to be raised for the distance in which aerosol or airborne transmission can otherwise occur.…”

“… 25 , 30 , 33 , 53 , 55 Concerns continue to be raised for the distance in which aerosol or airborne transmission can otherwise occur. 2 , 28 , 30 , 32 , 33 , 35 , 54 There are also possible contributions for heating, ventilation, and air conditioning units. 52 Aerosol transmission via plumbing systems and related air traps has introduced new hypotheses of spread, although a similar hypothesis was previously entertained in the SAR‐CoV‐1 era.…”