ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2025
Effectiveness and acceptability of ventilation modifications in healthcare facilities, Liberia 2022-2023.
Article in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness and acceptability of ventilation interventions in naturally ventilated hospitals in Liberia. Design: Difference-in-differences analysis of pre- and post-air changes per hour of intervention and control spaces. Setting: Hospitals in Bong and Montserrado Counties, Liberia. Participants: Seventy patient care spaces were evaluated at baseline. Six spaces underwent physical intervention modifications, while 2 spaces were assessed for indirect effects and 2 others used as controls. Healthcare workers were interviewed to assess ventilation knowledge and acceptability. Interventions: Ventilation interventions included the installation of window screens, louvered doors and windows, and wind turbines. Methods: We measured carbon dioxide levels with portable meters and documented persons per room to estimate per-person ventilation rates in both L/s/person for the initial assessment and air changes per hour (ACH) in the intervention. Measurements were taken in patient care spaces in 7 hospitals in Liberia. Healthcare worker acceptability was evaluated via structured interviews. Results: Two-thirds (46/70) of patient care spaces were below the WHO-recommended ventilation threshold of 60 L/s/person. Six spaces underwent ventilation interventions, including placement of window screens (3), wind turbines (2), and louvered doors and windows (1), with 2 additional spaces being indirectly affected by these interventions and 2 more spaces serving as controls. Ventilation improved by an average of 2 ACH in the spaces with wind turbines and louvered doors and windows. Overall acceptability of the interventions was high. Conclusions: Implementing interventions to improve ventilation in naturally ventilated healthcare facilities is efficacious, feasible, and acceptable, though longer-term evaluations should assess sustainability.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.