0
0
New research from the University of East Anglia challenges the effectiveness of air filtration systems in reducing the risk of viral illnesses. Despite extensive investigations into technologies such as air filtration, germicidal lights, and ionizers, the study found limited support for their ability to render indoor air safe from respiratory or gastrointestinal infections.
Prof. Paul Hunter of UEA’s Norwich Medical School explained that while air cleaners are designed to filter out pollutants or contaminants from circulating air, their efficacy in curbing airborne virus particles remains questionable. Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, various entities, including large corporations and governments like the NHS, the British military, New York City, and regional German governments, explored installing such technologies. However, their high cost necessitates a careful evaluation of benefits versus expenses, particularly in understanding their current capabilities.
The research team scrutinized 32 real-world studies conducted in settings like schools or care homes, analyzing evidence on microbial infections or symptoms in individuals exposed or unexposed to air treatment technologies. Despite ongoing studies initiated during the pandemic, none have been published yet.
Lead researcher Dr. Julii Brainard highlighted the investigation of technologies like filtration, germicidal lights, ionizers, or any method aiming to safely eliminate or deactivate viruses from breathable air. However, the study found no compelling evidence supporting the protective efficacy of these air treatment technologies in real-world scenarios.
Although existing evidence suggests that certain air treatment strategies can reduce environmental and surface contamination, such as germicidal lights and HEPA filtration, the combined findings indicate their ineffectiveness in preventing or reducing illnesses. Some weak evidence suggested a potential reduction in infection likelihood, but biases and imbalances were apparent in this data, potentially indicating unpublished studies with minimal or no effects.
While the results are disappointing, the researchers emphasized the importance of comprehensive information for public health decision-makers. They expressed hope that the studies conducted during the COVID-19 era will soon be published, enabling a more informed assessment of the value of air treatment technologies during the pandemic. This research was conducted in collaboration with various institutions including University College London, the University of Essex, the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital Trust, and the University of Surrey.
