Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Apr:122:115-125.
doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2021.12.018. Epub 2021 Dec 30.

Operating room ventilation systems: recovery degree, cleanliness recovery rate and air change effectiveness in an ultra-clean area

Affiliations
Free article
Review

Operating room ventilation systems: recovery degree, cleanliness recovery rate and air change effectiveness in an ultra-clean area

J L A Lans et al. J Hosp Infect. 2022 Apr.
Free article

Erratum in

Abstract

Background: Entrainment test methods are described in most European standards and guidelines to determine the protected area for ultra-clean ventilation (UCV) systems. New UCV systems, such as temperature-controlled airflow (TcAF) and controlled dilution ventilation (cDV) systems, claim the whole operating room (OR) to be ultra-clean. However, current test standards were not developed to assess ventilation effectiveness outside the standard protected area.

Aim: To assess and compare the ventilation effectiveness of four types of OR ventilation systems in the ultra-clean area using a uniform test grid.

Methods: Ventilation effectiveness of four ventilation systems was evaluated for three different ultra-clean (protected) areas: the standard protected area (A); the area outside the standard protected area (B); and a large protected area (AB). Ventilation effectiveness was assessed using recovery degree (RD), cleanliness recovery rate (CRR) and air change effectiveness (ACE).

Findings: RD, CRR and ACE were significantly higher for the unidirectional air flow (UDAF) system compared with the other systems in area A. In area B, the UDAF and cDV systems were comparable for RD and CRR, and the UDAF and conventional ventilation (CV) systems were comparable for ACE. In area AB, the UDAF and cDV systems were comparable for CRR and ACE, but significant differences were found in RD.

Conclusion: In area A, the ventilation effectiveness of the UDAF system outperformed other ventilation systems. In area B, the cDV system was best, followed by the UDAF, TcAF and CV systems. In area AB, the UDAF system was best, followed by the cDV, TcAF and CV systems.

Keywords: Air change effectiveness; Cleanliness recovery rate; Operating room; Recovery degree; Ultra-clean ventilation systems; Ventilation effectiveness.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

LinkOut - more resources