ArticleChest2020
Characterization of Experimental and Clinical Bioaerosol Generation During Potential Aerosol-Generating Procedures.
Article in Chest, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of Aerosol-Laden Plumes Generated by Jet Ventilation Using Background Oriented Schlieren.The Laryngoscope · 2025Article
- Assessment of the risk of aerosol transmission of CRKP during bronchoscopy in the intensive care unit.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2025Article
- Quantifying aerosol and microbial exposure of healthcare workers in endoscopy suites: a time-based study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Balancing Act: Evaluating the Need for Airborne Isolation Tools-Sometimes More Is Less.Respiratory care · 2024Article
- Bibliometric analysis of intestinal microbiota and lung diseases.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
- A new device for bronchoscopy for better protection.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2022Article
- Pulmonary Procedures in the COVID-19 Era.Current pulmonology reports · 2022Review
- Nasal endoscopy, room filtration, and aerosol concentrations during live outpatient encounters: a prospective, case-control study.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2022Article
- Article
- Pattern of cancer patient referral and organisational model of an interventional pulmonology programme during the COVID-19 pandemic.ERJ open research · 2021Article
- Can we improve teaching and learning of percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy's bronchoscopic guidance?SAGE open medicine · 2021Review
- The use of aerosol generating procedures (AGPs) during the COVID-19 pandemic in the diagnosis of lung cancer: a narrative review.Mediastinum (Hong Kong, China) · 2021Review
- Potential Aerosol Generation by Bronchoscopy And Intubation: Another Piece in the Puzzle.Chest · 2020Article
- Lower respiratory tract sampling in COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome: A focus on microbiology, cellular morphology, cytology, and management impact.Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest SocietyArticle
- A special oropharyngeal oxygenation device to facilitate apneic oxygenation in comparison to high flow oxygenation devices.Medical gas researchArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring medical procedures with the potential to produce aerosols such as bronchoscopy, intubation, or CPR, health-care workers (HCWs) may be exposed to infectious bioaerosols. This scenario is of particular concern when high consequence pathogens such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are circulating. Thousands of HCWs have been infected with SARS-CoV-2. However, the determinants of aerosol generation during medical procedures and their relative risk to HCWs remain poorly characterized. RESEARCH QUESTION: The goal of this study was to characterize aerosols produced during airway intubation by using an uninfected translational animal model and in human subjects undergoing elective aerosol-generating procedures. The study also determined the particle size distribution of generated particles. STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsAerosol generation was measured during highly controlled experimental (pig) intubations (N = 16) and elective bronchoscopies in uninfected patients (N = 49) using an optical particle counter. Recovery of normal respiratory flora was used as a surrogate for pathogen dispersion.
resultsThere was a small but significant (P = .03) decrease in 0.3 μm size particles during highly controlled pig intubations compared with baseline. The concentration of 1.0 μm and 5.0 μm aerosol particles did not significantly change, although oral bacteria were collected from the air. For elective patient bronchoscopies, there was a significant decrease in the generation of larger particles (1.0 μm and 5.0 μm) compared with baseline (P < .01); however, 18 of 39 (46%) patients showed increased aerosol production in 0.3 μm size particles, four of whom exhibited measurable increases.
interpretationAlthough the total amount of aerosols produced during intubation and bronchoscopy did not increase significantly relative to preprocedural levels, a small number of participants exhibited a measurable increase in submicron particle emission, meriting further research to delineate determinants of fine particle production during aerosol-generating procedures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.