
==== Front
Infect Prev Pract
Infect Prev Pract
Infection Prevention in Practice
2590-0889
Elsevier

S2590-0889(24)00053-2
10.1016/j.infpip.2024.100389
100389
Short Report
Airborne SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected during deliveries with unmasked patients
Thuresson Sara a
Alsved Malin a
Leijonhufvud Åsa bc
Herbst Andreas de
Medstrand Patrik f
Löndahl Jakob a
Fraenkel Carl-Johan carl-johan.fraenkel@med.lu.se
gh⁎
a Division of Ergonomics and Aerosol Technology, Department of Design Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
b Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Helsingborg Hospital, Lund University, Helsingborg, Sweden
c Department of Clinical Science Helsingborg, Lund University, Helsingborg, Sweden
d Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
e Institution for Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
f Department of Translational Medicine, Clinical Virology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
g Department of Infection Control, Region Skåne, Lund, Sweden
h Division of Infection Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
⁎ Corresponding author. Address: Division of Infection Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden carl-johan.fraenkel@med.lu.se
17 8 2024
12 2024
17 8 2024
6 4 1003892 4 2024
8 8 2024
© 2024 The Authors
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Summary

Background

Healthcare workers in obstetric clinics may be exposed to airborne SARS-CoV-2 when treating patients with COVID-19.

Method

In this study, performed during the midst of the pandemic, air samples were collected in delivery rooms during childbirth and analysed for SARS-CoV-2 RNA content.

Result

Six of 28 samples collected inside delivery rooms were positive for SARS-CoV-2, but none in anterooms or corridors. Five of the six positive samples were from the same occasion.

Discussion

This indicates that some patients could be major sources of exhaled virus, although the individual variation is large, and it is thus difficult to predict the risk of infection.

Keywords

SARS-CoV-2
Aerosols
Childbirth
COVID-19
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Numerous studies have investigated the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in hospital air to assess the risk of infection via inhalation when interacting with COVID-19 patients [[1], [2], [3]], but only a handful of studies have measured SARS-CoV-2 in delivery rooms [[4], [5], [6], [7]]. During childbirth, respiratory emissions are increased due to heavy breathing, potentially carrying infectious virus [8]. Moreover, the use of face masks in these situations is limited due to the physical exertion of pushing during delivery.

To date, published studies on airborne SARS-CoV-2 during delivery only include small numbers of air samples from childbirth (<25, often <10, per study) [[4], [5], [6], [7]]. For vaginal delivery, the total number of measured occasions is around 15, whereof airborne SARS-CoV-2 was only detected during 3. However, on several occasions patients wore a mask, which reduces respiratory emissions, and often room ventilation was high (up to 15 air exchanges per hour).

The aim of the current study was to further explore the presence of airborne SARS-CoV-2 RNA during vaginal delivery by patients without face masks.

Methods

The research team was notified by clinicians when a mother who had recently tested positive for COVID-19 was about to give birth. Air samples were then collected at two hospitals in Southern Sweden during Nov 2020 to Jan 2022, before, during and after delivery over the course of 1–6 hours. The air samplers were placed 0.5–2.5 m from the mother's head, at a height of about 1 m. Samples were also collected from adjacent anterooms and corridors. The delivery rooms were constructed with an outside air delivery rate of 60–120 litres/second (∼3–6 air changes per hour), and the possibility to use an additional mobile High-Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA)–filtration unit. Ventilation measurements or any use of a HEPA-filtration unit was not recorded in this study.

Liquid cyclones (Coriolis μ, Bertin Instruments) were used for air collection, operating at 200 L min−1 for 10 min, with 15 mL of phosphate-buffered saline solution as collection liquid. The collection liquid was concentrated using Amicon Ultra-15 centrifugal filter units (50 kDa cutoff, Merck Millipore) and stored at -80 °C until analysis. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected by real time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) performed as in our previous work [9].

Ethics statement

The study was approved by the National Ethical Review Board in Sweden (number 2020-01396).

Results and discussion

In total, 43 air samples were collected during six childbirths, of which 28 were from delivery rooms, 9 from anterooms, 5 from corridors and 1 from a canteen in the ward. The number of collected and positive samples per occasion, as well as patient characteristics, are presented in Table I.Table I Patient characteristics and collected air samples for each sampling occasion

Table IIndividual	Time spentin DRa beforefirst sampling(hrs)	Days sincelast positivetest	Days sincesymptomonset	Symptomsat delivery	Anaesthesiac	SARS-CoV-2 positive/collected air samples	
Total collectedfrom DRa	Beforepushing	Duringpushing	Afterdelivery	
1	8	0	12	Nasal congestion	NO, ED	0/4	0/2	0/1	0/1	
2	7.5	3b	3	Nasal congestion	NO	0/6	0/0	0/0	0/6	
3	4	3	-	Asymptomatic	NO, S	5/5	2/2	2/2	1/1	
4	11.5	0	2	Sore throat	NO, ED	1/6	1/2	0/2	0/2	
5	4.5	2	5	“Minor symptoms”	NO	0/4	0/1	0/2	0/1	
6	7	0	0	Low grade fever	NO, ED	0/3	0/1	0/2	0/0	
a DR = delivery room.

b Tested negative on the day of delivery.

c NO= nitrous oxide; ED=epidural; S=spinal.

All air samples were positive from inside the room of patient 3, who never showed any symptoms but was positive by PCR. The father, who was present in the room, was also positive by PCR. The sample collected from the anteroom to patient 3's delivery room was negative, indicating limited spread of virus particles through the entrance door. Patient 4 was positive by rapid antigen test and had a sore throat, but only one positive air sample (before delivery) was found. Patient 4 was likely close to symptom onset, increasing the probability of a high viral load and subsequent higher risk of emitting airborne virus [9]. However, patients 2 and 6 were also early on in the disease but provided only negative air samples. Face masks were not worn by the patients on any of the occasions.

All positive samples were found at a distance of 1–2 m from the patient. RNA concentrations were low (Ct values 37.7–40.5), similar to concentrations usually found in hospital environments where COVID-19 patients are present [1,2]. All samples from anterooms and corridors were negative. The risk of false positives we consider as low; all negative controls were negative by RT-qPCR.

Compared to previous studies of SARS-CoV-2 in air, both during childbirth and from other hospital environments, the proportion of positive air samples in our study was high (21% compared to around 10%) [1]. However, this is mainly attributed to patient 3 where all five samples were positive. A comparable study revealed a similar pattern, with around 20 % positive samples in total whereof the majority from a single patient [5]. In a study performed in the same area during the same time period, 17 patients of 88 (19%) showed at least one SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive sample in collected patient room air, as compared to 2 of 6 (33%) in this study [9]. The results indicate that there are patients who potentially spread a lot of virus during childbirth, similar to covid-care in general, but it is difficult to predict who those will be. Healthcare personnel often have prolonged and close contact with patients during childbirth in rooms that are not primarily designed for infection prevention. This increases the risk of exposure to airborne virus, which motivates the use of face masks and other prevention strategies against airborne pathogens. Enhanced ventilation is one additional measure that could be used [9], and the negative results of all anteroom and corridor samples indicate that ventilation measures prevented long-range transport of virus outside of the patient room in this study.

Conflicts of interest

No conflict of interest is reported from any of the authors.

Source of funding

AFA insurance (grant numbers 220077 and 220155 ), The Swedish research council FORMAS (grant numbers 2020-01490 and 2022-00323 ), the 10.13039/501100004359 Swedish Research Council (grant number 2022-00311 ) and 10.13039/501100009252 SciLifeLab Pandemic Laboratory Preparedness (PLP) Program.

Credit author statement

Sara Thuresson: Investigation, Writing-Original Draft, Writing-Review & Editing.

Malin Alsved: Investigation, Writing-Review & Editing.

Åsa Leijonhufvud: Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing-Review & Editing.

Andreas Herbst: Investigation, Writing-Review & Editing.

Patrik Medstrand: Investigation, Writing-Review & Editing, Funding acquisition.

Jakob Löndahl: Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing-Review & Editing, Funding acquisition.

Carl-Johan Fraenkel: Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing-Review & Editing.

Acknowledgements

Thank you to Jonathan Soldemyr for assisting in collecting air samples, and to Sviataslau Sasinovich for performing RT-qPCR.
==== Refs
References

1 Dinoi A. Feltracco M. Chirizzi D. Trabucco S. Conte M. Gregoris E. DA review on measurements of SARS-CoV-2 genetic material in air in outdoor and indoor environments: Implication for airborne transmission Sci Total Environ 809 2022 151137 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151137
2 Birgand G. Peiffer-Smadja N. Fournier S. Kerneis S. Lescure F.X. Lucet J.C. Assessment of air contamination by SARS-CoV-2 in hospital settings JAMA Netw Open 3 12 2020 e2033232 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.33232 [published correction appears in JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Jan 4;4(1):e2037904
3 Ribaric N.L. Vincent C. Jonitz G. Hellinger A. Ribaric G. Hidden hazards of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in hospitals: A systematic review Indoor Air 32 1 2022 e12968 10.1111/ina.12968
4 Schoen C.N. Morgan E. Leftwich H.K. Rogers C. Soorneedi A. Suther C. Failure to Detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the Air During Active Labor in Mothers Who Recently Tested Positive Front Public Health 10 2022 881613 10.3389/fpubh.2022.881613 Published 2022 Apr 27
5 Hermesch A.C. Horve P.F. Edelman A. Dietz L. Constant D. Fretz M. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Environmental Contamination and Childbirth Obstet Gynecol 136 2020 827 829 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004112 32826519
6 Hawks R.J.M. Ades V. Roman A.S. Penfield C.A. Goddard B. COVID-19 transmissibility during labor and vaginal delivery Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 5 1 2023 100770 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2022.100770
7 Lee P.E. Kozak R. Alavi N. Mbareche H. Kung R.C. Murphy K.E. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 contamination in the operating room and birthing room setting: a cross-sectional study CMAJ Open 10 2 2022 E450 E459 10.9778/cmajo.20210321 Published 2022 May 24
8 Mok T. Harris E. Vargas A. Afshar Y. Han C.S. Karagozian A. Evaluation of Respiratory Emissions During Labor and Delivery: Potential Implications for Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Obstet Gynecol 138 4 2021 616 621 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004533 34623073
9 Thuresson S. Fraenkel C.-J. Sasinovich S. Soldemyr J. Widell A. Medstrand P. Airborne Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in Hospitals: Effects of Aerosol-Generating Procedures, HEPA-Filtration Units, Patient Viral Load, and Physical Distance Clin Infect Dis 75 1 2022 e89 e96 10.1093/cid/ciac161 35226740
