Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34031667›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2021

Controlling risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in essential workers of enclosed food manufacturing facilities.

Julia S Sobolik, Elizabeth T Sajewski, Lee-Ann Jaykus, D Kane Cooper, Ben A Lopman, Alicia Nm Kraay, P Barry Ryan, Juan S Leon

Open access · greenAbstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Julia S SobolikRollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA USA.
Elizabeth T SajewskiRollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA USA.
Lee-Ann JaykusFood, Bioprocessing and Nutrition Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, 27695.
D Kane CooperRollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA USA.
Ben A LopmanRollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA USA.
Alicia Nm KraayRollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA USA.
P Barry RyanRollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA USA.
Juan S LeonRollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA USA.
Emory University · USNorth Carolina State University · US

Funding

Graduate and Postdoctoral Training in ToxicologyT32ES012870 · NIEHS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Carmen Joseph Marsit · 2004 to 2026
$9.1M
Preparing for the SARS-CoV2 vaccine: Modeling of transmission pathways, viral evolution and vaccination strategiesR01GM124280 · NIGMS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI LOPMAN, BENJAMIN A · 2018 to 2022
$2.2M
Infectious Diseases Across Scales Training ProgramT32AI138952 · NIAID · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Jacobus de Roode · 2019 to 2026
$1.8M
NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI138952NIEHS NIH HHS T32 ES012870NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM124280
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic poses significant health risks to workers who are essential to maintaining the food supply chain. Using a quantitative risk assessment model, this study characterized the impact of risk reduction strategies for controlling SARS-CoV-2 transmission (droplet, aerosol, fomite-mediated) among front-line workers in a representative enclosed food manufacturing facility. We simulated: 1) individual and cumulative SARS-CoV-2 infection risks from close contact (droplet and aerosols at 1-3m), aerosol, and fomite-mediated exposures to a susceptible worker following exposure to an infected worker during an 8h-shift; and 2) the relative reduction in SARS-CoV-2 infection risk attributed to infection control interventions (physical distancing, mask use, ventilation, surface disinfection, hand hygiene). Without mitigation measures, the SARS-CoV-2 infection risk was largest for close contact (droplet and aerosol) at 1m (0.96, 95%CI: 0.67-1.0). In comparison, risk associated with fomite (0.26, 95%CI: 0.10-0.56) or aerosol exposure alone (0.05, 95%CI: 0.01-0.13) at 1m distance was substantially lower (73-95%). At 1m, droplet transmission predominated over aerosol and fomite-mediated transmission, however, this changed by 3m, with aerosols comprising the majority of the exposure dose. Increasing physical distancing reduced risk by 84% (1 to 2m) and 91% (1 to 3m). Universal mask use reduced infection risk by 52-88%, depending on mask type. Increasing ventilation (from 0.1 to 2-8 air changes/hour) resulted in risk reductions of 14-54% (1m) and 55-85% (2m). Combining these strategies, together with handwashing and surface disinfection, resulted in <1% infection risk. Current industry SARS-CoV-2 risk reduction strategies, particularly when bundled, provide significant protection to essential food workers. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Using mathematical modeling, we find that workers in enclosed food manufacturing facilities are at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection from close contact transmission (exposure to large droplets and small aerosol particles) than fomite transmission. Thus, strategies protecting workers should prioritize close contact transmission pathways, such as physical distancing, universal mask use, and room air changes, with surface disinfection (reducing fomite transmission) and handwashing of secondary importance. Our work supports current international (EU-OSHA), domestic (FDA, OSHA), and food industry-standard guidance for managing COVID-19 transmission in essential workers in the food manufacturing sector. Although our model was designed for an indoor food manufacturing setting, it can be readily adapted to other indoor environments and infectious respiratory pathogens.

Identifiers

PMID34031667
PMCPMC8142669
OpenAlexW3163886612

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.