Department of Occupational Health and Environment, Centre for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, Epalinges CH-1066, Switzerland.
Department of Occupational Health and Environment, Centre for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, Epalinges CH-1066, Switzerland.
Water Res. 2023 Sep 1;243:120413. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2023.120413. Epub 2023 Jul 26.
In the context of climate change policies, buildings must implement solutions to reduce energy and water consumption. One such solution is showering with water atomization showerheads, which can significantly reduce water and energy usage. However, the lack of risk assessment for users' health has hindered the widespread adoption of this technology. To address this gap, we assess the risk of spreading bacteria, in particular the pathogenic bacterium Legionella pneumophila, from shower hose biofilms of different ages grown under controlled or uncontrolled conditions considering different levels of water hardness, during showering using water atomization showerheads (ECO) or continuous flow showerheads (STA). We compared the aerosol and bioaerosol emission - total, viable and cultivable - during a 10 min shower event between the two shower systems. We showed that the water-atomization showerhead emitted slightly more nanoparticles smaller than 0.45 µm and slightly fewer particles larger than 0.5 µm than the continuous flow showerhead. Additionally, ECO showerheads emitted fewer cultivable bacteria than STA, regardless of the biofilm's age or growth conditions. When Legionella pneumophila was detected in biofilms, ECO showerheads released slightly less cultivable Legionella in the first flush of shower water compared to the STA, ranging from 6.0 × 10 to 1.6 × 10 CFU·L. However, cultivable L. pneumophila was not detected in the aerosols emitted during showering with either showerhead. These findings suggest that emerging water-drop emission technologies might affect human exposure to aerosols differently than traditional systems, emphasizing the importance of assessing the health risks associated with any new shower system. Additionally, these findings provide valuable insights for achieving a balance between water and energy conservation.
在气候变化政策的背景下，建筑物必须采取措施来减少能源和水的消耗。一种解决方案是使用雾化淋浴头淋浴，这可以显著减少水和能源的使用。然而，由于缺乏对用户健康风险的评估，这项技术的广泛采用受到了阻碍。为了解决这一差距，我们评估了在不同的水硬度水平下，在控制或不受控制的条件下，不同年龄的淋浴软管生物膜中细菌（特别是致病性细菌嗜肺军团菌）传播的风险，考虑到使用雾化淋浴头（ECO）或连续流量淋浴头（STA）淋浴时的不同条件。我们比较了两种淋浴系统在 10 分钟淋浴事件期间气溶胶和生物气溶胶排放的总排放量、活菌数量和可培养菌数量。结果表明，与连续流量淋浴头相比，雾化淋浴头排放的小于 0.45μm 的纳米颗粒略多，大于 0.5μm 的颗粒略少。此外，无论生物膜的年龄或生长条件如何，ECO 淋浴头释放的可培养细菌都比 STA 淋浴头少。当生物膜中检测到嗜肺军团菌时，与 STA 相比，ECO 淋浴头在首次淋浴水中释放的可培养军团菌略少，范围从 6.0×10 到 1.6×10 CFU·L。然而，在使用任何一种淋浴头淋浴时，气溶胶中都没有检测到可培养的嗜肺军团菌。这些发现表明，新兴的水滴排放技术可能会以不同于传统系统的方式影响人类对气溶胶的暴露，这强调了评估任何新淋浴系统相关健康风险的重要性。此外，这些发现为在水和能源节约之间取得平衡提供了有价值的见解。
