Wieslander G, Norbäck D, Wålinder R, Erwall C, Venge P
Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Uppsala University Hospital, S-751 85 Uppsala, Sweden.
Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 1999 Nov;72(8):507-15. doi: 10.1007/s004200050408.
There is a need to evaluate possible health effects of ventilation improvements and emissions from new buildings, in longitudinal studies. New methods to study biological effects on the eyes and upper airways are now available.
A longitudinal study was performed on 83 trained social workers in two offices in Uppsala, Sweden. The exposed group (n = 57) moved to a newly redecorated building nearby. Low emitting building material had been used, including a new type of solvent-free water-based paint. The control group (n = 26) worked in the same office during the study period (November 1995 to February 1996). Hygiene management was carried out in both offices, at the beginning and the end of the investigation. Tear film stability (BUT) was measured. Nasal patency was measured by acoustic rhinometry, and eosinophilic cationic protein (ECP), myeloperoxidase (MPO), lysozyme and albumin were analyzed in nasal lavage fluid (NAL).
The relocation resulted in an increase in the personal outdoor airflow rate from 11 to 22 l/s. Indoor concentrations of terpenes were higher in the new building, and powdering of the new linoleum floor was observed. Measurements showed low levels of volatile organic compounds (VOC), formaldehyde, carbon dioxide (CO(2)), nitrogen dioxide, respirable dust, and microorganisms in the air of all buildings. The move resulted in an increased nasal patency and an increase of ECP and lysozyme in NAL, after adjusting for changes in the control group. No changes were observed for nasal or ocular symptoms. A seasonal effect, with a decrease of ECP, was observed in the control group. CONCLUSSION A well-ventilated office building can be redecorated without any major ocular or nasal effects, or measurable increase of indoor air pollution if low-emitting building materials are selected. In agreement with previous evidence, the improved ventilation flow may explain the increase of nasal patency. The increase of ECP and lysozyme in NAL suggested an inflammatory effect in the new building. Since this building had increased ventilation flow, increased concentrations of terpenes, and powdering from the polish on the new linoleum floor, identification of causative agents was difficult. The hygiene measures did not give any evidence that emissions from the new type of solvent-free water-based paints or building dampness were responsible for the observed nasal effects. Considering the higher emissions of VOC reported from older types of water-based latex paints and solvent-based wall paints, the new type of solvent-free water-based paint seems to be a good choice from the hygiene point of view.
在纵向研究中，有必要评估通风改善和新建筑排放物可能对健康产生的影响。目前已有研究眼睛和上呼吸道生物效应的新方法。
对瑞典乌普萨拉两个办公室的83名训练有素的社会工作者进行了一项纵向研究。暴露组（n = 57）搬到了附近一座新装修的建筑中。使用了低排放建筑材料，包括一种新型无溶剂水性漆。对照组（n = 26）在研究期间（1995年11月至1996年2月）在同一办公室工作。在调查开始和结束时，两个办公室都进行了卫生管理。测量了泪膜稳定性（BUT）。通过鼻声反射测量鼻通畅度，并对鼻灌洗液（NAL）中的嗜酸性阳离子蛋白（ECP）、髓过氧化物酶（MPO）、溶菌酶和白蛋白进行了分析。
搬迁导致个人室外气流速率从11升/秒增加到22升/秒。新建筑内萜烯的室内浓度较高，并且观察到新油毡地板有粉末化现象。测量结果显示，所有建筑物空气中的挥发性有机化合物（VOC）、甲醛、二氧化碳（CO₂）、二氧化氮、可吸入粉尘和微生物含量较低。在对对照组的变化进行调整后，搬迁导致鼻通畅度增加，NAL中ECP和溶菌酶增加。未观察到鼻部或眼部症状有变化。在对照组中观察到季节性效应，即ECP降低。结论：如果选择低排放建筑材料，通风良好的办公楼可以重新装修，而不会产生任何重大的眼部或鼻部影响，也不会导致室内空气污染有可测量的增加。与先前的证据一致，通风流量的改善可能解释了鼻通畅度的增加。NAL中ECP和溶菌酶的增加表明新建筑中有炎症效应。由于这座建筑通风流量增加、萜烯浓度升高以及新油毡地板上的抛光剂有粉末化现象，因此难以确定致病因素。卫生措施没有提供任何证据表明新型无溶剂水性漆的排放物或建筑潮湿是观察到的鼻部影响的原因。考虑到较旧类型的水性乳胶漆和溶剂型墙面漆报告的VOC排放量较高，从卫生角度来看，新型无溶剂水性漆似乎是一个不错的选择。
