Airborne transmission route for the spread of COVID-19

aerosol infection


Identifying airborne transmission as the dominant route for the spread of COVID-19
Renyi Zhang, ProfileYixin Li, Annie L. Zhang, ProfileYuan Wang, and Mario J. Molina
Significance
We have elucidated the transmission pathways of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by analyzing the trend and mitigation measures in the three epicenters. Our results show that the airborne transmission route is highly virulent and dominant for the spread of COVID-19. The mitigation measures are discernable from the trends of the pandemic. Our analysis reveals that the difference with and without mandated face-covering represents the determinant in shaping the trends of the pandemic. This protective measure significantly reduces the number of infections. Other mitigation measures, such as social distancing implemented in the United States, are insufficient by themselves in protecting the public. Our work also highlights the necessity that sound science is essential in decision-making for the current and future public health pandemics.
Abstract
Various mitigation measures have been implemented to fight the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, including widely adopted social distancing and mandated face covering. However, assessing the effectiveness of those intervention practices hinges on the understanding of virus transmission, which remains uncertain. Here we show that airborne transmission is highly virulent and represents the dominant route to spread the disease. By analyzing the trend and mitigation measures in Wuhan, China, Italy, and New York City, from January 23 to May 9, 2020, we illustrate that the impacts of mitigation measures are discernable from the trends of the pandemic. Our analysis reveals that the difference with and without mandated face-covering represents the determinant in shaping the pandemic trends in the three epicenters. This protective measure alone significantly reduced the number of infections, that is, by over 75,000 in Italy from April 6 to May 9 and over 66,000 in New York City from April 17 to May 9. Other mitigation measures, such as social distancing implemented in the United States, are insufficient by themselves in protecting the public. We conclude that wearing face masks in public corresponds to the most effective means to prevent interhuman transmission, and this inexpensive practice, in conjunction with simultaneous social distancing, quarantine, and contact tracing, represents the most likely fighting opportunity to stop the COVID-19 pandemic. Our work also highlights the fact that sound science is essential in decision-making for current and future public health pandemics.
Keywords:
The novel coronavirus outbreak, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020, has infected over 4 million people and caused nearly 300,000 fatalities in 188 countries. The intensive effort is ongoing worldwide to establish effective treatments and develop a vaccine for the disease. The novel coronavirus, named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), belongs to the family of the pathogen that is responsible for respiratory illness linked to the 2002–2003 outbreak (SARS-CoV-1). The enveloped virus contains a positive-sense single-stranded RNA genome and a nucleocapsid of helical symmetry of ∼120 nm. There exist several plausible pathways for viruses to be transmitted from person to person. Human atomization of virus-bearing particles occurs from coughing/sneezing and even from normal breathing/talking by an infected person. These mechanisms of viral shedding produce large droplets and small aerosols, which are conventionally delineated at a size of 5 μm to characterize their distinct dispersion efficiencies and residence times in air as well as the deposition patterns along the human respiratory tract. Virus transmission occurs via direct (deposited on persons) or indirect (deposited on objects) contact and airborne (droplets and aerosols) routes. Large droplets readily settle out of the air to cause person/object contamination; in contrast, aerosols are efficiently dispersed in the air. While transmission via direct or indirect contact occurs in a short range, airborne transmission via aerosols can occur over an extended distance and time. Inhaled virus-bearing aerosols deposit directly along the human respiratory tract.
Previous experimental and observational studies on interhuman transmission have indicated a significant role of aerosols in the transmission of many respiratory viruses, including influenza virus, SARS-CoV-1, and the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV). For example, airborne coronavirus MERS-CoV exhibited a strong capability of surviving, with about 64% of microorganisms remaining infectious 60 min after atomization at 25 °C and 79% relative humidity (RH). On the other hand, rapid virus decay occurred, with only 5% survival over a 60-minute procedure at 38 °C and 24% RH, indicative of inactivation. Recent experimental studies have examined the stability of SARS-CoV-2, showing that the virus remains infectious in aerosols for hours and on surfaces for up to days.
Several parameters likely influence the microorganism’s survival and delivery in the air, including temperature, humidity, microbial resistance to external physical and biological stresses, and solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation. Transmission and infectivity of airborne viruses are also dependent on the size and concentration of inhaled aerosols, which regulate the amount (dose) and pattern for respiratory deposition. With typical nasal breathing (i.e., at a velocity of ∼1 m⋅s−1), inhalation of airborne viruses leads to direct and continuous deposition into the human respiratory tract. In particular, fine aerosols (i.e., particulate matter smaller than 2.5 μm, or PM2.5) penetrate deeply into the respiratory tract and even reach other vital organs. In addition, viral shedding is dependent on the stages of infection and varies between symptomatic and asymptomatic carriers. A recent finding showed that the highest viral load in the upper respiratory tract occurs at the symptom onset, suggesting the peak of infectiousness on or before the symptom onset and substantial asymptomatic transmission for SARS-CoV-2.
The COVID-19 outbreak is significantly more pronounced than that of the 2002/2003 SARS, and the disease continues to spread at an alarming rate worldwide, despite extreme measures taken by many countries to constrain the pandemic. The enormous scope and magnitude of the COVID-19 outbreak reflect not only a highly contagious nature but also exceedingly efficient transmission for SARS-CoV-2. Currently, the mechanisms to spread the virus remain uncertain, particularly considering the relative contribution of the contact vs. airborne transmission routes to this global pandemic. Available epidemiological and experimental evidence, however, implicates airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 via aerosols as a potential route for the spreading of the disease.
Distinct Pandemic Trends in the Three Epicenters
To gain insight into the mechanism of the virus transmission routes and assess the effectiveness of mitigation measures, we analyzed the trend of the pandemic worldwide from January 23 to May 9, 2020. The COVID-19 outbreak initially emerged in December 2019 in Wuhan, China. The number of confirmed infections and fatalities in China dominated the global trend during January and February 2020, but the increases in the newly confirmed cases and fatalities in China have exhibited sharp declines since February. In contrast to the curve flattening in China, those numbers in other countries have increased sharply since the beginning of March. The epicenter shifted from Wuhan to Italy in early March and to New York City (NYC) in early April. By April 30, the numbers of confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths, respectively, reached over 200,000 and 27,000 in Italy and over 1,000,000 and 52,000 in the United States, compared to about 84,000 and 4,600 in China. Notably, the curves in Italy exhibit a slowing trend since mid-April, while the numbers in the world and the United States continue to increase. Remarkably, the recent trends in the numbers of infections and fatalities in the world and the United States exhibit striking linearity since the beginning of April.
Understanding the Impacts of Face Covering
Compared to the simultaneous implementation of measures in China, intervention measures were successively implemented in the Western world (Fig. 2A), providing an opportunity for assessing their relative effectiveness. We quantified the effects of face-covering by projecting the number of infections based on the data before implementing the use of face masks in Italy on April 6 and NYC on April 17. Such projections are reasonable considering the excellent linear correlation for the data before the onset of mandated face covering. Our analysis indicates that face-covering reduced the number of infections by over 75,000 in Italy from April 6 to May 9 and by over 66,000 in NYC from April 17 to May 9. In addition, varying the correlation from 15 d to 30 d before the onset of the implementation reveals little difference in the projection for both places, because of the high correlation coefficients (SI Appendix, Fig. S1). Notably, the trends of the infection curves in Italy and NYC contrast to those in the world and the United States (Fig. 1C), which show little deviation from the linearity due to the non-implementation of face-covering measures globally and nationally, respectively. The inability of social distancing, quarantine, and isolation alone to curb the spread of COVID-19 is also evident from the linearity of the infection curve before the onset of the face-covering rule in Italy on April 6 and in NYC on April 17 (Fig. 2 B and C). Hence, the difference made by implementing face-covering significantly shapes the pandemic trends worldwide.
Dominant Airborne Transmission
We further elucidated the contribution of airborne transmission to the COVID-19 outbreak by comparing the trends and mitigation measures during the pandemic worldwide and by considering the virus transmission routes (Fig. 4). Face covering prevents both airborne transmissions by blocking atomization and inhalation of virus-bearing aerosols and contact transmission by blocking viral shedding of droplets. On the other hand, social distancing, quarantine, and isolation, in conjunction with hand sanitizing, minimize contact (direct and indirect) transmission but do not protect against airborne transmission. With social distancing, quarantine, and isolation in place worldwide and in the United States since the beginning of April, airborne transmission represents the only viable route for spreading the disease, when mandated face covering is not implemented. Similarly, airborne transmission also contributes dominantly to the linear increase in the infection before the onset of mandated face-covering in Italy and NYC (Fig. 2 B and C and SI Appendix, Fig. S1). Hence, the unique function of face-covering to block atomization and inhalation of virus-bearing aerosols accounts for the significantly reduced infections in China, Italy, and NYC (Figs. 1–3), indicating that airborne transmission of COVID-19 represents the dominant route for infection.
A Policy Perspective
The governments’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic have so far differed significantly worldwide. Swift actions to the initial outbreak were undertaken in China, as reflected by the nearly simultaneous implementation of various aggressive mitigation measures. On the other hand, the response to the pandemic was generally slow in the Western world, and implementation of the intervention measures occurred only consecutively. The responsiveness of the mitigation measures governed the evolution, scope, and magnitude of the pandemic globally (Figs. 1 and 2).
Curbing COVID-19 relies not only on decisive and sweeping actions but also, critically, on the scientific understanding of the virus transmission routes, which determines the effectiveness of the mitigation measures (Fig. 5). In the United States, social distancing and stay-at-home measures, in conjunction with hand sanitizing (Fig. 5, path A), were implemented during the early stage of the pandemic (20). These measures minimized short-range contact transmission but did not prevent long-range airborne transmission, responsible for the inefficient containing of the pandemic in the United States (Figs. 1 and 3). Mandated face covering, such as those implemented in China, Italy, and NYC, effectively prevented airborne transmission by blocking atomization and inhalation of virus-bearing aerosols and contact transmission by blocking viral shedding of droplets. While the combined face-covering and social distancing measures offered dual protection against the virus transmission routes, the timing and sequence of implementing the measures also exhibited distinct outcomes during the pandemic. For example, social distancing measures, including city lockdown and stay-at-home orders, were implemented well before face covering was mandated in Italy and NYC (Fig. 5, path B), and this sequence left an extended window (28 d in Italy and 32 d in NYC) for largely uninterrupted airborne transmission to spread the disease (Figs. 2 and 3). The simultaneous implementation of face covering and social distancing (Fig. 5, path C), such as that undertaken in China, was most optimal, and this configuration, in conjunction with extensive testing and contact tracing, was responsible for the curve flattening in China (Fig. 1). Also, there likely existed remnants of virus transmission after the implementation of regulatory measures, because of circumstances when the measures were not practical or were disobeyed and/or imperfection of the measures. Such limitations, which have been emphasized by the WHO (1), spurred controversial views on the validity of wearing face masks to prevent virus transmission during the pandemic (30). However, it is implausible that the limitations of mitigation measures alone contributed dominantly to the global pandemic trend, as exemplified by the success in China. Our work suggests that the failure to contain the propagation of the COVID-19 pandemic worldwide is largely attributed to the unrecognized importance of airborne virus transmission (1, 20).
Fig. 5.
Mitigation paradigm. Scenarios of virus transmission under the distancing/quarantine/isolation measure only (path A), the measures with distancing/quarantine/isolation followed by face covering (path B), and the measures with simultaneous face covering and distancing/quarantine/isolation (path C). The short-dashed arrows label possible remnants of virus transmission due to circumstances when the measure is not possible or disobeyed and/or imperfection of the measure.
Conclusions
The inadequate knowledge of virus transmission has inevitably hindered the development of effective mitigation policies and resulted in the unstoppable propagation of the COVID-19 pandemic (Figs. 1–3). In this work, we show that airborne transmission, particularly via nascent aerosols from human atomization, is highly virulent and represents the dominant route for the transmission of this disease. However, the importance of airborne transmission has not been considered in the establishment of mitigation measures by government authorities (1, 20). Specifically, while the WHO and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have emphasized the prevention of contact transmission, both WHO and CDC have largely ignored the importance of the airborne transmission route (1, 20). The current mitigation measures, such as social distancing, quarantine, and isolation implemented in the United States, are insufficient by themselves to protect the public. Our analysis reveals that the difference with and without mandated face-covering represents the determinant in shaping the trends of the pandemic worldwide. We conclude that wearing face masks in public corresponds to the most effective means to prevent interhuman transmission, and this inexpensive practice, in conjunction with extensive testing, quarantine, and contact tracing, poses the most probable fighting opportunity to stop the COVID-19 pandemic, before the development of a vaccine. It is also important to emphasize that sound science should be effectively communicated to policymakers and should constitute the prime foundation in decision-making amid this pandemic. Implementing policies without a scientific basis could lead to catastrophic consequences, particularly in light of attempts to reopen the economy in many countries. Integration between science and policy is crucial to the formulation of effective emergency responses by policymakers and preparedness by the public for the current and future public health pandemics.