Interventions used to improve air flow in hospitals – a rapid review

Design

The review was designed following the approach for rapid evidence reviews developed by Tricco et al (2017) with scope to incorporate relevant grey literature. The review followed a phased approach, which begins with a broad search strategy that is expanded with each round of searches. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement to guide the review design and the reporting of the methods and findings.

The research questions guiding the review were:

RQ1: What are the types of interventions currently being used to improve air flow in hospitals?

RQ2: Have any of these been evaluated? If so, what are the main evaluation findings? RQ3: What are the main lessons learnt from the implementation of these interventions?

Search strategy and approach

The search strategy was developed by researchers and relevant clinical colleagues. The first phase of the search strategy was broad and was run on general databases such as Google Scholar and PubMed. This led to the selection of a preliminary list of resources. This list was scanned for relevant key terms. The final search strategy is available in Appendix 1.

The search was not limited in any way other than to streamline outcomes, interventions, and the environment of the study. There was no date, language or location limitation, the inclusion criteria is available in Appendix 2. Final searches were conducted at the end of July 2023 on three databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library).

Document selection

The search results were imported into EndNote and duplicates were removed. Once this was complete all included references were imported into Rayyan for screening.

Following the initial screening of title and abstract, three researchers cross-checked 10% of exclusions against the inclusion criteria. The remaining publications that met the inclusion criteria were organised and allocated randomly between three researchers to facilitate full text screening.

The following inclusion criteria were applied

Peer reviewed articles where interventions improving air flow are mentioned in the context of hospital settings, this could also be discussed in terms of a respiratory virus/infection.

No restriction on date, language, or study location.

To ensure the search was manageable, we did not include articles related to air flow in any other environment, PhD theses, dissertations, books, conference proceedings, incomplete versions, articles where we could not access the full text or letters to editors. The full inclusion criteria is available in Appendix 2.

Data extraction

Data extraction was conducted using Microsoft Excel to organise the review process. The extraction form was piloted with two initial studies, and amendments were made before extracting data from all included studies. Data was extracted by three reviewers and checked by another member of the team.

Data synthesis

Data were synthesised using narrative synthesis.

Quality assessment

The methodological quality of the empirical articles was critically appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) (Hong et al, 2018). The MMAT was developed to allow systematic reviewers assess the methodological quality of diverse study designs, including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods.

Article selection

The initial search yielded 5848 articles (after duplicates were removed), 5715 articles were excluded as these did not meet the inclusion criteria outlined above, one article was removed at this stage as it could not be retrieved. We reviewed 130 articles at the full text stage and excluded 112 because they did not describe air flow, were not carried out in a hospital setting, were a simulation or model of air flow, or were excluded study designs such as reviews, or was a wrong publication type. 18 articles were included in the review (see Figure 1 for the PRISMA Flow Diagram).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1. PRISMA Flow diagram.

Article characteristics

Main article characteristics are summarised in Table 1. Three articles were from the UK, three from the USA, two from Australia, one article from China, Hong Kong, Ireland, Korea, Germany, Czech Republic, Singapore, South Africa, Iran and Italy.

Concentration of aerosol particles

Conway Morris et al (2022) discussed the accumulation of aerosols depending on whether patients had respiratory support, suggesting that patients in ICU were commonly at a later stage of disease and as a result, may secrete fewer virus particles when they exhale. These findings suggest that aerosol precautions may, therefore, be more important in conventional wards than in well-defined aerosol risk areas.

Seven of the studies discussed the importance of ACUs, HEPA machines and filters in reducing the amount and size of aerosol particles in the air. Butler et al (2023) found that particles up to 10µm travelled considerable distances around a ward (beyond 2m), however, the ACU reduced the PM levels throughout the space (not just near the device). Oberst and Heinrich (2021) similarly reported that the addition of a filter into a consultation room could significantly reduce the risk of airborne transmission, with aerosol concentration decreasing by a minimum of 50%. Mousavi et al (2022) found that there was a significant accumulation of particles observed when the HEPA machines were both off, suggesting the key role of filtration in maintaining the air cleanliness. One study suggested that air ventilation (open windows) alone was unable to reduce concentrations back to baseline levels without the aid of an AFU, with the ‘windows open, AFU on’ condition producing the lowest concentrations and highest clearance rate of PM2.5 (Fennelly et al, 2022). Salmonsmith et al (2023) reported that PAC mitigation is very effective in clearing the air of aerosols in rooms, this could also reduce the half-life aerosols by 82%, Gola et al (2020) also found that filtration units reduced local airborne loads and suggested they should be used in hard functional areas such as ICUs. As Rezaei et al (2020) looked at cleaning rooms, they identified that a HVAC system provided exhaust air ranging from 50-80 degrees Celsius and with 40-50% humidity, under these conditions COVID-19 was observed to rapidly disappear improving infection control across whole hospitals.

Conversely, one study found that the existing ward HVAC system alone was inefficient when clearing a patient room of aerosols and that commercially available air cleaners may have a key role in clearing aerosolized particles that may contain respiratory viruses, such as SARS-CoV-2, in clinical environments (Buising et al, 2022).

Changes in/effect of air speed and ventilation

When looking at measuring ventilation changes as a result of changes in the number of people in the room, it was found that, when there had been a failure to ‘dilute’ the air through ventilation, it was necessary to increase the ventilation rate (either naturally or through mechanical ventilation) or reduce the amount of people allowed in the room (Lu et al, 2021). When testing the movement of air in a sealed ward one study found that, when the door was closed, all tested wards had inward airflow or there was no outward airflow, suggesting that these new SARS wards are effective in securing no-leakage of cubicle air into the corridors, even when some of the cubicles failed to maintain a negative pressure difference (Li et al, 2007). Portable air cleaning units with high flow rates (16.7 & 19.6 ACH) reduced clearance time significantly, two ACUs in a room reduced the clearance time to under 10 minutes (Lee et al, 2021). Ryan et al (2011) looked at changes after introducing enhanced UV germicidal irradiation in HVAC systems, after six-weeks contamination on the system was not detected and at 6-months HVAC cultures were near zero (p<0.0001), showing the eUVGI to be extremely effective in reducing contamination.

One study found that, even though HEPA filtration and its regular monitoring were declared to be used, the authors could not collect objective data verifying its real efficacy and function on site (Vokurka et al, 2014). Similarly, Park et al (2023) found that even with a ventilation system, opening windows allowed for natural ventilation and minimised the spread of particles to adjacent rooms.

Improvements or reduction in health conditions

Three articles outlined improvements in health conditions as a result of an intervention to improve air flow. Ryan et al (2011) reported after using an enhanced UV germicidal irradiation in HVAC systems, ventilator-assisted pneumonia (VAP) was decreased to 55% after 6-months and 44% after 18-months. Abdul-Salam et al (2010) found that after HEPA filters were installed, incidences of invasive aspergillosis (IA) significantly decreased, individuals admitted after the HEPA filters were installed had around 51% lower risk of acquiring IA. Rao et al (2020) found improvements after the implementation of portable PECO air purifiers. Pre to post-intervention for patients showed non-invasive ventilation improved from 77% to 23%, rate of nebuliser use from 59% to 41% and rate of intubation from 57.1% to 43%, however, these findings were not statistically significant.