Reducing aerosol dispersion by high flow therapy in COVID‐19: High resolution computational fluid dynamics simulations of particle behavior during high velocity nasal insufflation with a simple surgical mask

Scott Leonard,Wayne Strasser,Jessica S. Whittle,Leonithas I. Volakis,Ronald J. DeBellis,Reid Prichard,Charles W. Atwood,George C. Dungan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/emp2.12158
2020-06-11
Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians Open
Abstract:<section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Objective</h3><p>All respiratory care represents some risk of becoming an Aerosol Generating Procedure (AGP) during COVID‐19 patient management. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and Environmental Control/Engineering is advised. High Velocity Nasal Insufflation (HVNI) and High Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC) deliver High Flow Oxygen (HFO) therapy, established as a competent means of supporting oxygenation for acute respiratory distress patients, including that precipitated by COVID‐19. Although unlikely to present a disproportionate particle dispersal risk, AGP from HFO continues to be a concern. Previously, we published a preliminary model. Here, we present a subsequent high‐resolution simulation (higher complexity/reliability) to provide a more accurate and precise particle characterization on the effect of surgical masks on patients during HVNI, Low‐Flow Oxygen therapy (LFO2), and tidal breathing.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Methods</h3><p>This <i>in‐silico </i> modeling study of HVNI, LFO2, and tidal breathing presents ANSYS Fluent Computational Fluid Dynamics simulations that evaluate the effect of Type I surgical mask use over patient face on particle/droplet behavior. </p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Results</h3><p>This <i>in‐silico </i> modeling simulation study of HVNI (40L∙min<sup>‐1</sup>) with a simulated surgical mask suggests 88.8% capture of exhaled particulate mass in the mask, compared to 77.4% in LFO2 (6L∙min<sup>‐1</sup>) capture, with particle distribution escaping to the room (&gt;1m from face) lower for HVNI+Mask versus LFO2+Mask (8.23% versus 17.2%). The overwhelming proportion of particulate escape was associated with mask‐fit designed model gaps. Particle dispersion was associated with lower velocity. </p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Conclusions</h3><p>These simulations suggest employing a surgical mask over the HVNI interface may be useful in reduction of particulate mass distribution associated with AGPs.</p><p>This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved</p></section>
What problem does this paper attempt to address?