Potential environmental transmission routes of SARS-CoV-2 inside a large meat processing plant experiencing COVID-19 clusters
de Rooij, M. M. T.; Sikkema, R. S.; Bouwknegt, M.; de Geus, Y.; Stanoeva, K. R.; Nieuwenweg, S.; van Dam, S.; Raben, C.; Dohmen, W.; Heederik, D.; Reusken, C.; Meijer, A.; Koopmans, M.; Franz, E.; Smit, L.
Show abstract
Worldwide exceptionally many COVID-19 clusters were observed in meat processing plants. Many contributing factors, promoting transmission, were suggested, including climate conditions in cooled production rooms favorable for environmental transmission but actual sampling studies are lacking. We aimed to assess SARS-CoV-2 contamination of air and surfaces to gain insight in potential environmental transmission in a large Dutch meat processing plant experiencing COVID-19 clusters. We performed SARS-CoV-2 screening of workers operating in cooled production rooms and intensive environmental sampling during a two-week study period in June 2020. Sampling of air (both stationary and personal), settling dust, ventilation systems, and sewage was performed. Swabs were collected from high-touch surfaces and workers hands. Screening of workers was done using oronasopharyngeal swabs. Samples were tested for presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by RT-qPCR. Of the 76 (predominantly asymptomatic) workers tested, 27 (35.5%) were SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive with modest to low viral loads (Ct[≥]29.7). In total, 6 out of 203 surface swabs were positive (Ct [≥]38), being swabs taken from communal touchscreens/handles. One of the 12 personal air samples and one of the 4 sewage samples were positive, RNA levels were low (Ct[≥]38). All other environmental samples tested negative. Although one-third of workers tested SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive, environmental contamination was limited. Hence widespread transmission of SARS-CoV-2 via air and surfaces was considered unlikely within this plant at the time of investigation in the context of strict COVID-19 control measures in place.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Occupational and environmental exposure to SARS-CoV-2 in and around infected mink farms 97%
- Occupation, Work-Related Contact, and SARS-CoV-2 Anti-Nucleocapsid Serological Status: Findings from the Virus Watch prospective cohort study 94%
- Under the Microscope: Formaldehyde Inhalation Exposure in NHS Pathology Departments 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Experimental efficacy of the face shield and the mask against emitted and potentially received particles 93%
- Assessing the Impact of Non-exhaust Emissions on the Asthmatic Airway (IONA) Protocol for a randomised three exposure crossover study 93%
- Model Calculations of Aerosol Transmission of COVID-19 and Infection Risk in Indoor Environments 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluating Fomite Risk of Brown Paper Bags Storing Personal Protective Equipment Exposed to SARS-CoV-2: A Quasi-Experimental Study 94%
- Monitoring occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 in school populations: a wastewater-based approach 93%
- Aerosol tracer testing in Boeing 767 and 777 aircraft to simulate exposure potential of infectious aerosol such as SARS-CoV-2 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- COVID-19 Prediction using Genomic Footprint of SARS-CoV-2 in Air, Surface Swab and Wastewater Samples 94%
- Passively Sensing SARS-CoV-2 RNA in Public Transit Buses 93%
- Can 10x cheaper, lower-efficiency particulate air filters and box fans complement High-Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) purifiers to help control the COVID-19 pandemic? 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.