Upper-Room Ultraviolet Light and Negative Air Ionization to Prevent Tuberculosis Transmission
Author(s)
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
Background
Institutional tuberculosis (TB) transmission is an important public health problem highlighted
by the HIV/AIDS pandemic and the emergence of multidrug- and extensively drug-resistant TB.
Effective TB infection control measures are urgently needed. We evaluated the efficacy of upperroom
ultraviolet (UV) lights and negative air ionization for preventing airborne TB transmission
using a guinea pig air-sampling model to measure the TB infectiousness of ward air.
Methods and Findings
For 535 consecutive days, exhaust air from an HIV-TB ward in Lima, Peru´, was passed through
three guinea pig air-sampling enclosures each housing approximately 150 guinea pigs, using a
2-d cycle. On UV-off days, ward air passed in parallel through a control animal enclosure and a
similar enclosure containing negative ionizers. On UV-on days, UV lights and mixing fans were
turned on in the ward, and a third animal enclosure alone received ward air. TB infection in
guinea pigs was defined by monthly tuberculin skin tests. All guinea pigs underwent autopsy
to test for TB disease, defined by characteristic autopsy changes or by the culture of
Mycobacterium tuberculosis from organs. 35% (106/304) of guinea pigs in the control group
developed TB infection, and this was reduced to 14% (43/303) by ionizers, and to 9.5% (29/307)
by UV lights (both p , 0.0001 compared with the control group). TB disease was confirmed in
8.6% (26/304) of control group animals, and this was reduced to 4.3% (13/303) by ionizers, and
to 3.6% (11/307) by UV lights (both p , 0.03 compared with the control group). Time-to-event
analysis demonstrated that TB infection was prevented by ionizers (log-rank 27; p , 0.0001)
and by UV lights (log-rank 46; p , 0.0001). Time-to-event analysis also demonstrated that TB
disease was prevented by ionizers (log-rank 3.7; p ¼ 0.055) and by UV lights (log-rank 5.4; p ¼
0.02). An alternative analysis using an airborne infection model demonstrated that ionizers
prevented 60% of TB infection and 51% of TB disease, and that UV lights prevented 70% of TB
infection and 54% of TB disease. In all analysis strategies, UV lights tended to be more
protective than ionizers.
Conclusions
Upper-room UV lights and negative air ionization each prevented most airborne TB
transmission detectable by guinea pig air sampling. Provided there is adequate mixing of room
air, upper-room UV light is an effective, low-cost intervention for use in TB infection control in
high-risk clinical settings
Institutional tuberculosis (TB) transmission is an important public health problem highlighted
by the HIV/AIDS pandemic and the emergence of multidrug- and extensively drug-resistant TB.
Effective TB infection control measures are urgently needed. We evaluated the efficacy of upperroom
ultraviolet (UV) lights and negative air ionization for preventing airborne TB transmission
using a guinea pig air-sampling model to measure the TB infectiousness of ward air.
Methods and Findings
For 535 consecutive days, exhaust air from an HIV-TB ward in Lima, Peru´, was passed through
three guinea pig air-sampling enclosures each housing approximately 150 guinea pigs, using a
2-d cycle. On UV-off days, ward air passed in parallel through a control animal enclosure and a
similar enclosure containing negative ionizers. On UV-on days, UV lights and mixing fans were
turned on in the ward, and a third animal enclosure alone received ward air. TB infection in
guinea pigs was defined by monthly tuberculin skin tests. All guinea pigs underwent autopsy
to test for TB disease, defined by characteristic autopsy changes or by the culture of
Mycobacterium tuberculosis from organs. 35% (106/304) of guinea pigs in the control group
developed TB infection, and this was reduced to 14% (43/303) by ionizers, and to 9.5% (29/307)
by UV lights (both p , 0.0001 compared with the control group). TB disease was confirmed in
8.6% (26/304) of control group animals, and this was reduced to 4.3% (13/303) by ionizers, and
to 3.6% (11/307) by UV lights (both p , 0.03 compared with the control group). Time-to-event
analysis demonstrated that TB infection was prevented by ionizers (log-rank 27; p , 0.0001)
and by UV lights (log-rank 46; p , 0.0001). Time-to-event analysis also demonstrated that TB
disease was prevented by ionizers (log-rank 3.7; p ¼ 0.055) and by UV lights (log-rank 5.4; p ¼
0.02). An alternative analysis using an airborne infection model demonstrated that ionizers
prevented 60% of TB infection and 51% of TB disease, and that UV lights prevented 70% of TB
infection and 54% of TB disease. In all analysis strategies, UV lights tended to be more
protective than ionizers.
Conclusions
Upper-room UV lights and negative air ionization each prevented most airborne TB
transmission detectable by guinea pig air sampling. Provided there is adequate mixing of room
air, upper-room UV light is an effective, low-cost intervention for use in TB infection control in
high-risk clinical settings
Date Issued
2009-03-17
Date Acceptance
2009-01-21
Citation
PLOS Medicine, 2009, 6 (3)
ISSN
1549-1277
Publisher
Public Library of Science
Journal / Book Title
PLOS Medicine
Volume
6
Issue
3
Copyright Statement
This is an open-access article
distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Public Domain
declaration, which stipulates that,
once placed in the public domain,
this work may be freely reproduced,
distributed, transmitted, modified,
built upon, or otherwise used by
anyone for any lawful purpose.
distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Public Domain
declaration, which stipulates that,
once placed in the public domain,
this work may be freely reproduced,
distributed, transmitted, modified,
built upon, or otherwise used by
anyone for any lawful purpose.
License URL
Subjects
Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Medicine, General & Internal
General & Internal Medicine
MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
ELECTROSTATIC SPACE-CHARGE
REDUCING AIRBORNE PATHOGENS
GERMICIDAL IRRADIATION
NOSOCOMIAL TUBERCULOSIS
SALMONELLA-ENTERITIDIS
RESISTANT TUBERCULOSIS
HATCHING CABINETS
INFECTED PATIENTS
DISINFECTION
RISK
Publication Status
Published
Article Number
e1000043