What Is an Aerosol-Generating Procedure?
Michael Klompas,Meghan Baker,Chanu Rhee
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2020.6643
2021-02-01
JAMA Surgery
Abstract:The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has brought renewed urgency to the question of what constitutes an aerosol-generating procedure. Public health agencies have long noted that certain medical procedures increase transmission risk for respiratory pathogens because they generate aerosols. In contrast with respiratory droplets, aerosols are minute respiratory particles that are small enough and light enough to remain suspended in the air for long periods of time, travel beyond 6 ft from the source patient, and penetrate or circumnavigate surgical masks. Therefore, health care workers are cautioned to wear N95 respirators during aerosol-generating procedures in patients with possible SARS-CoV-2 infection, and if possible, to use airborne infection isolation rooms with 12 or more air changes per hour and negative air flow to minimize the amount of infectious aerosols in the room and to prevent their spread beyond the room.However, in practice, there is no consensus on which procedures are aerosol generating. The World Health Organization stipulates that intubation, noninvasive positive pressure ventilation, tracheotomy, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, bronchoscopy, and sputum induction are definite aerosol-generating procedures because epidemiologic studies have associated these procedures with greater risk for health care worker infections.<sup><a class="ref-link section-jump-link" href="#svp200038r1">1</a></sup> By contrast, high-flow oxygen and nebulization are only designated as possible aerosol-generating procedures because associations between these procedures and health care worker infections have been equivocal.With the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, professional societies have unilaterally declared a plethora of additional procedures as aerosol generating, including nasogastric tube placement, thoracentesis, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy, cardiac catheterization, exercise tolerance tests, pulmonary function tests, percutaneous gastric tube placement, facial surgery, second stage of labor, and others. To our knowledge, most of these designations were made on theoretical grounds rather than formal quantifications of aerosol generation or epidemiologic studies demonstrating increased risk for infection. None of these procedures appear on the official lists of aerosol-generating procedures published by the World Health Organization or the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.<sup><a class="ref-link section-jump-link" href="#svp200038r2">2</a></sup><sup>,<a class="ref-link section-jump-link" href="#svp200038r3">3</a></sup>To add to the confusion, a recent study documented that controlled intubations and extubations in asymptomatic patients generate a negligible amount of aerosols and indeed a tiny fraction of the amount generated by volitional coughing.<sup><a class="ref-link section-jump-link" href="#svp200038r4">4</a></sup> The same has been documented of bronchoscopy and noninvasive ventilation.<sup><a class="ref-link section-jump-link" href="#svp200038r5">5</a></sup> How then do we explain the studies associating these procedures with increased risk for health care worker infections?The answer lies in the evolving science of respiratory transmission. It has become clear that the traditional dichotomy between droplet vs aerosol-based transmission is overly simplistic. In practice, people routinely produce a profusion of respiratory particles in a range of sizes that include both droplets and aerosols as well as particles in between.<sup><a class="ref-link section-jump-link" href="#svp200038r6">6</a></sup> Respiratory particles of all sizes can carry virus and all are potentially capable of transmitting infection. The amount of respiratory particles one emits varies by activity. Quiet breathing generates a small but steady flow of aerosols. Loud speaking, heavy breathing, and coughing produce far more. Larger respiratory particles will rapidly fall to the ground within a narrow radius of the source patient. Smaller respiratory particles can remain suspended in the air but will diffuse and get diluted by the surrounding air leading to progressively lower concentrations of virus the further one is from the source patient.This translates into 4 factors that explain transmission risk during medical procedures. The first is forced air. Any time air is forced over moist respiratory mucosa, it will generate more virus-laden respiratory particles. This may explain the increased risk of infection associated with noninvasive positive pressure ventilation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. However, by the same logic, coughing, spirometry, and heavy breathing should also be considered aerosol generating because these activities also increase the velocity and volume of air being forced over respiratory mucosa.The second factor is symptoms and disease severity. Symptomatic patients are more likely to have active in <p>-Abstract Truncated-</p>
surgery