RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Assessing the effectiveness of portable HEPA air cleaners for reducing particulate matter exposure in King County, Washington homeless shelters during the COVID-19 pandemic: implications for community congregate settings
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2023.01.20.23284493
DO 10.1101/2023.01.20.23284493
A1 Huang, Ching-Hsuan
A1 Bui, Thu
A1 Hwang, Daniel
A1 Shirai, Jeffry
A1 Austin, Elena
A1 Cohen, Martin
A1 Gould, Timothy
A1 Larson, Timothy
A1 Novosselov, Igor
A1 Tan, Shirlee
A1 Seto, Edmund
YR 2023
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/01/22/2023.01.20.23284493.abstract
AB Over four thousand portable air cleaners (PACs) with high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters were distributed by Public Health - Seattle & King County to homeless shelters during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of these HEPA PACs in reducing indoor particles and understand the factors that affect their use in homeless shelters. Four rooms across three homeless shelters with varying geographic locations and operating conditions were enrolled in this study. At each shelter, multiple PACs were deployed based on the room volume and PAC’s clean air delivery rate rating. The energy consumption of these PACs was measured using energy data loggers at 1-min intervals to allow tracking of their use and fan speed for three two-week sampling rounds, separated by single-week gaps, between February and April 2022. Total optical particle number concentration (OPNC) was measured at 2-min intervals at multiple indoor locations and an outdoor ambient location. The empirical indoor and outdoor total OPNC were compared for each site. Additionally, linear mixed-effects regression models (LMERs) were used to assess the relationship between PAC use time and indoor/outdoor total OPNC ratios (I/OOPNC). Based on the LMER models, one percent increase in the hourly, daily and total time PACs were used significantly reduced I/OOPNC by 0.34 [95% CI: 0.28, 0.40], 0.51 [95% CI: 0.20, 0.78], 2.52 [95% CI: 1.50, 3.28], respectively, indicating that keeping PACs on resulted in significantly lower I/OOPNC or relatively lower indoor total OPNC than outdoors. The survey suggested that keeping PACs on and running was the main challenge when operating them in shelters. These findings suggested that HEPA PACs were an effective short-term strategy to reduce indoor particle levels in community congregate living settings during non-wildfire seasons and the need for formulating practical guidance for using them in such an environment.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis project was supported by cooperative agreement EH20-2005 funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Human Subjects Division of University of Washington gave ethical approval for this work. Institutional Review Board of Washington State gave ethical approval for this work.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData not available due to participant consent.