Abstract
OBJECTIVES—Building sickness syndrome remains poorly understood. Aetiological factors range from temperature, humidity, and air movement to internal pollutants, dust, lighting, and noise factors. The reported study was designed to investigate whether relations between symptoms of sick building syndrome and measured environmental factors existed within state of the art air conditioned buildings with satisfactory maintenance programmes expected to provide a healthy indoor environment. METHODS—Five buildings were studied, three of which were state of the art air conditioned buildings. One was a naturally ventilated control building and one a previously studied and known sick building. A questionnaire was administered to the study population to measure the presence of building related symptoms. This was followed by a detailed environmental survey in identified high and low symptom areas within each building. These areas were compared for their environmental performance. RESULTS—Two of the air conditioned buildings performed well with a low prevalence of building related symptoms. Both of these buildings out performed the naturally ventilated building for the low number of symptoms and in many of the environmental measures. One building (C), expected to perform well from a design viewpoint had a high prevalence of symptoms and behaved in a similar manner to the known sick building. Environmental indices associated with symptoms varied from building to building. Consistent associations between environmental variables were found for particulates (itchy eyes, dry throat, headache, and lethargy) across all buildings. There were persisting relations between particulates and symptoms (headache, lethargy, and dry skin) even in the building with the lowest level of symptoms and of measured airborne particulates (building B). There were also consistent findings for noise variables with low frequency noise being directly associated with symptoms (stuffy nose, itchy eyes, and dry skin) and higher frequency noise being relatively protective across all buildings. CONCLUSIONS—This is the first epidemiological study of expected state of the art, air conditioned buildings. These buildings can produce an internal environment better than that of naturally ventilated buildings for both reported symptoms and environmental variables. The factors associated with symptoms varied widely across the different buildings studied although consistent associations for symptoms were found with increased exposure to particulates and low frequency noise. Keywords: building sickness syndrome; particulates; low frequency noise
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (123.1 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Abbritti G., Muzi G., Accattoli M. P., Fiordi T., Dell'Omo M., Colangeli C., Gabrielli A. R., Fabbri T., D'Alessandro A. High prevalence of sick building syndrome in a new air-conditioned building in Italy. Arch Environ Health. 1992 Jan-Feb;47(1):16–22. doi: 10.1080/00039896.1992.9935939. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bachmann M. O., Myers J. E. Influences on sick building syndrome symptoms in three buildings. Soc Sci Med. 1995 Jan;40(2):245–251. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(94)e0068-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Burton D. J. Inadequate air distribution and poor mixing cause IAQ problems. Moving partitions, walls, and furniture may change the air flow, often for the worse. Occup Health Saf. 1996 Mar;65(3):20–21. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dietert R. R., Hedge A. Toxicological considerations in evaluating indoor air quality and human health: impact of new carpet emissions. Crit Rev Toxicol. 1996 Nov;26(6):633–707. doi: 10.3109/10408449609037480. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Harrison J., Pickering C. A., Faragher E. B., Austwick P. K., Little S. A., Lawton L. An investigation of the relationship between microbial and particulate indoor air pollution and the sick building syndrome. Respir Med. 1992 May;86(3):225–235. doi: 10.1016/s0954-6111(06)80060-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hodgson M. J., Frohliger J., Permar E., Tidwell C., Traven N. D., Olenchock S. A., Karpf M. Symptoms and microenvironmental measures in nonproblem buildings. J Occup Med. 1991 Apr;33(4):527–533. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Jaakkola J. J., Miettinen P. Ventilation rate in office buildings and sick building syndrome. Occup Environ Med. 1995 Nov;52(11):709–714. doi: 10.1136/oem.52.11.709. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Menzres D., Tamblyn R. M., Nunes F., Hanley J., Tamblyn R. T. Exposure to varying levels of contaminants and symptoms among workers in two office buildings. Am J Public Health. 1996 Nov;86(11):1629–1633. doi: 10.2105/ajph.86.11.1629. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Nordström K., Norbäck D., Akselsson R. Influence of indoor air quality and personal factors on the sick building syndrome (SBS) in Swedish geriatric hospitals. Occup Environ Med. 1995 Mar;52(3):170–176. doi: 10.1136/oem.52.3.170. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Teeuw K. B., Vandenbroucke-Grauls C. M., Verhoef J. Airborne gram-negative bacteria and endotoxin in sick building syndrome. A study in Dutch governmental office buildings. Arch Intern Med. 1994 Oct 24;154(20):2339–2345. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Woods J. E. An engineering approach to controlling indoor air quality. Environ Health Perspect. 1991 Nov;95:15–21. doi: 10.1289/ehp.919515. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]