TY - JOUR T1 - Laboratory Study of Physical Barrier Efficiency for Worker Protection against SARS-CoV-2 while Standing or Sitting JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2021.07.26.21261146 SP - 2021.07.26.21261146 AU - Jacob Bartels AU - Cheryl Fairfield Estill AU - I-Chen Chen AU - Dylan Neu Y1 - 2021/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/07/29/2021.07.26.21261146.abstract N2 - Transparent barriers were installed as a response to the SARS-COV-2 pandemic in many customer-facing industries. Transparent barriers are an engineering control that are utilized to intercept air traveling between customers to workers. Information on the effectiveness of these barriers against aerosols is limited. In this study, a cough simulator was used to represent a cough from a customer. Two optical particle counters were used (one on each side of the barrier, labeled reference and worker) to determine the number of particles that migrated around a transparent barrier. Nine barrier sizes and a no barrier configuration were tested with six replicates each. Tests of these 10 configurations were conducted for both sitting and standing scenarios to represent configurations common to nail salons and grocery stores, respectively. Barrier efficiency was calculated using a ratio of the particle count results (reference/worker). Barriers had better efficiency when they were 9 to 39 cm (3.5 to 15.5”) above cough height and at least 91 cm (36”) wide, 92% and 93% respectively. Barriers that were 91 cm (36”) above table height for both scenarios blocked 71% or more of the particles between 0.35–0.725 µm and 68% for particles between 1 to 3 µm. A barrier that blocked an initial cough was effective at reducing particle counts. While the width of barriers was not as significant as height in determining barrier efficiency it was important that a barrier be placed where interactions between customers and workers are most frequent.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis research was funded by the CDC. NIOSH is a part of the CDCAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:NIOSH Institutional Review BoardAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll the data that has been tabulated in the manuscript can be provided in a more accessible format. ER -