5 research outputs found

    A comparison of passive and active dust sampling methods for measuring airborne methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in pig farms

    Get PDF
    Methicillin-resistant strains of Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are resistant to most β-lactam antibiotics. Pigs are an important reservoir of livestock-associated MRSA (LA-MRSA), which is genetically distinct from both hospital and community-acquired MRSA. Occupational exposure to pigs on farms can lead to LA-MRSA carriage by workers. There is a growing body of research on MRSA found in the farm environment, the airborne route of transmission, and its implication on human health. This study aims to directly compare two sampling methods used to measure airborne MRSA in the farm environment; passive dust sampling with electrostatic dust fall collectors (EDCs), and active inhalable dust sampling using stationary air pumps with Gesamtstaubprobenahme (GSP) sampling heads containing Teflon filters. Paired dust samples using EDCs and GSP samplers, totaling 87 samples, were taken from 7 Dutch pig farms, in multiple compartments housing pigs of varying ages. Total nucleic acids of both types of dust samples were extracted and targets indicating MRSA (femA, nuc, mecA) and total bacterial count (16S rRNA) were quantified using quantitative real-time PCRs. MRSA could be measured from all GSP samples and in 94% of the EDCs, additionally MRSA was present on every farm sampled. There was a strong positive relationship between the paired MRSA levels found in EDCs and those measured on filters (Normalized by 16S rRNA; Pearson's correlation coefficient r = 0.94, Not Normalized; Pearson's correlation coefficient r = 0.84). This study suggests that EDCs can be used as an affordable and easily standardized method for quantifying airborne MRSA levels in the pig farm setting

    Spatial Variation of Endotoxin Concentrations Measured in Ambient PM10 in a Livestock-Dense Area: Implementation of a Land-Use Regression Approach

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Results from studies on residential health effects of livestock farming are inconsistent, potentially due to simple exposure proxies used (e.g., livestock density). Accuracy of these proxies compared with measured exposure concentrations is unknown. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess spatial variation of endotoxin in PM10 (particulate matter ≤10μm) at residential level in a livestock-dense area, compare simple livestock exposure proxies to measured endotoxin concentrations, and evaluate whether land-use regression (LUR) can be used to explain spatial variation of endotoxin. METHODS: The study area (3,000 km2) was located in Netherlands. Ambient PM10 was collected at 61 residential sites representing a variety of surrounding livestock-related characteristics. Three to four 2-wk averaged samples were collected at each site. A local reference site was used for temporal variation adjustment. Samples were analyzed for PM10 mass by weighing and for endotoxin by using the limulus amebocyte lysate assay. Three LUR models were developed, first a model based on general livestock-related GIS predictors only, followed by models that also considered species-specific predictors and farm type-specific predictors. RESULTS: Variation in concentrations measured between sites was substantial for endotoxin and more limited for PM10 (coefficient of variation: 43%, 8%, respectively); spatial patterns differed considerably. Simple exposure proxies were associated with endotoxin concentrations although spatial variation explained was modest (R2<26%). LUR models using a combination of animal-specific livestock-related characteristics performed markedly better, with up to 64% explained spatial variation. CONCLUSION: The considerable spatial variation of ambient endotoxin concentrations measured in a livestock-dense area can largely be explained by LUR modeling based on livestock-related characteristics. Application of endotoxin LUR models seems promising for residential exposure estimation within health studies. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP2252

    Occupational and environmental exposure to SARS-CoV-2 in and around infected mink farms

    No full text
    Objective Unprecedented SARS-CoV-2 infections in farmed minks raised immediate concerns regarding transmission to humans and initiated intensive environmental investigations to assess occupational and environmental exposure. Methods Air sampling was performed at infected Dutch mink farms, at farm premises and at nearby residential sites. A range of other environmental samples were collected from minks' housing units, including bedding materials. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was analysed in all samples by quantitative PCR. Results Inside the farms, considerable levels of SARS-CoV-2 RNA were found in airborne dust, especially in personal inhalable dust samples (approximately 1000-10 000 copies/m 3). Most of the settling dust samples tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA (82%, 75 of 92). SARS-CoV-2 RNA was not detected in outdoor air samples, except for those collected near the entrance of the most recently infected farm. Many samples of minks' housing units and surfaces contained SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Conclusions Infected mink farms can be highly contaminated with SARS-CoV-2 RNA. This warns of occupational exposure, which was substantiated by considerable SARS-CoV-2 RNA concentrations in personal air samples. Dispersion of SARS-CoV-2 to outdoor air was found to be limited and SARS-CoV-2 RNA was not detected in air samples collected beyond farm premises, implying a negligible risk of environmental exposure to nearby communities. Our occupational and environmental risk assessment is in line with whole genome sequencing analyses showing mink-to-human transmission among farm workers, but no indications of direct zoonotic transmission events to nearby communities

    Occupational and environmental exposure to SARS-CoV-2 in and around infected mink farms

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE: Unprecedented SARS-CoV-2 infections in farmed minks raised immediate concerns regarding transmission to humans and initiated intensive environmental investigations to assess occupational and environmental exposure. METHODS: Air sampling was performed at infected Dutch mink farms, at farm premises and at nearby residential sites. A range of other environmental samples were collected from minks' housing units, including bedding materials. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was analysed in all samples by quantitative PCR. RESULTS: Inside the farms, considerable levels of SARS-CoV-2 RNA were found in airborne dust, especially in personal inhalable dust samples (approximately 1000-10 000 copies/m3). Most of the settling dust samples tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA (82%, 75 of 92). SARS-CoV-2 RNA was not detected in outdoor air samples, except for those collected near the entrance of the most recently infected farm. Many samples of minks' housing units and surfaces contained SARS-CoV-2 RNA. CONCLUSIONS: Infected mink farms can be highly contaminated with SARS-CoV-2 RNA. This warns of occupational exposure, which was substantiated by considerable SARS-CoV-2 RNA concentrations in personal air samples. Dispersion of SARS-CoV-2 to outdoor air was found to be limited and SARS-CoV-2 RNA was not detected in air samples collected beyond farm premises, implying a negligible risk of environmental exposure to nearby communities. Our occupational and environmental risk assessment is in line with whole genome sequencing analyses showing mink-to-human transmission among farm workers, but no indications of direct zoonotic transmission events to nearby communities

    Occupational and environmental exposure to SARS-CoV-2 in and around infected mink farms

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE: Unprecedented SARS-CoV-2 infections in farmed minks raised immediate concerns regarding transmission to humans and initiated intensive environmental investigations to assess occupational and environmental exposure. METHODS: Air sampling was performed at infected Dutch mink farms, at farm premises and at nearby residential sites. A range of other environmental samples were collected from minks' housing units, including bedding materials. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was analysed in all samples by quantitative PCR. RESULTS: Inside the farms, considerable levels of SARS-CoV-2 RNA were found in airborne dust, especially in personal inhalable dust samples (approximately 1000-10 000 copies/m3). Most of the settling dust samples tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA (82%, 75 of 92). SARS-CoV-2 RNA was not detected in outdoor air samples, except for those collected near the entrance of the most recently infected farm. Many samples of minks' housing units and surfaces contained SARS-CoV-2 RNA. CONCLUSIONS: Infected mink farms can be highly contaminated with SARS-CoV-2 RNA. This warns of occupational exposure, which was substantiated by considerable SARS-CoV-2 RNA concentrations in personal air samples. Dispersion of SARS-CoV-2 to outdoor air was found to be limited and SARS-CoV-2 RNA was not detected in air samples collected beyond farm premises, implying a negligible risk of environmental exposure to nearby communities. Our occupational and environmental risk assessment is in line with whole genome sequencing analyses showing mink-to-human transmission among farm workers, but no indications of direct zoonotic transmission events to nearby communities
    corecore