Geelen L M J, Huijbregts M A J, Ragas A M J, Bretveld R W, Jans H W A, van Doorn W J, Evertz S J C J, van der Zijden A
Office of Environmental Health & Safety, Public Health Services Brabant/Zeeland, Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands.
Indoor Air. 2008 Oct;18(5):416-24. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0668.2008.00542.x. Epub 2008 Jul 31.
Poor air quality in schools has been associated with adverse health effects. Indoor air quality can be improved by increasing ventilation. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of different interventions to improve ventilation behavior in primary schools. We used indoor CO(2) concentrations as an indicator. In 81 classes of 20 Dutch primary schools, we applied three different interventions: (i) a class-specific ventilation advice; (ii) the advice combined with a CO(2) warning device and (iii) the advice combined with a teaching package. The effectiveness of the interventions was tested directly after intervention and 6 weeks after intervention by measuring the CO(2) concentrations and comparison with a control group (iv). Before intervention, the CO(2) concentration exceeded 1000 ppm for 64% of the school day. The class-specific ventilation advice without further support appeared an ineffective tool to improve ventilation behavior. The advice in combination with a CO(2) warning device or the teaching package proved effective tools and resulted in lower indoor CO(2) concentrations when compared with the control group. Ventilation was significantly improved, but CO(2) concentrations still exceeded 1000 ppm for more than 40% of the school day. Hence, until ventilation facilities are upgraded, the CO(2) warning device and the teaching package are useful low-cost tools.
To improve ventilation behavior and indoor air quality in schools, CO(2) warning device and teaching package combined with a class-specific ventilation advice, are effective tools, while giving the ventilation advice solely, is not effective. Although ventilation is significantly improved through behavioral change, the ventilation rate is still insufficient to maintain good air quality during the full school day. Therefore, the improvement of the ventilation facilities is recommended. Hence, until ventilation facilities in schools are upgraded, the CO(2) warning device and the teaching package are useful low-cost tools to improve current indoor air quality.
学校空气质量差与不良健康影响相关。可通过增加通风来改善室内空气质量。本研究的目的是比较不同干预措施改善小学通风行为的效果。我们将室内二氧化碳浓度作为指标。在荷兰20所小学的81个班级中，我们应用了三种不同的干预措施：（i）针对班级的通风建议；（ii）该建议与二氧化碳警示装置相结合；（iii）该建议与教学包相结合。在干预后及干预6周后，通过测量二氧化碳浓度并与对照组（iv）进行比较来测试干预措施的效果。干预前，64%的上课时间内二氧化碳浓度超过1000 ppm。没有进一步支持的针对班级的通风建议似乎是改善通风行为的无效工具。与二氧化碳警示装置或教学包相结合的建议被证明是有效的工具，与对照组相比，可使室内二氧化碳浓度降低。通风得到显著改善，但仍有超过40%的上课时间内二氧化碳浓度超过1000 ppm。因此，在通风设施升级之前，二氧化碳警示装置和教学包是有用的低成本工具。
为改善学校的通风行为和室内空气质量，二氧化碳警示装置和教学包与针对班级的通风建议相结合是有效的工具，而仅给出通风建议则无效。尽管通过行为改变通风得到显著改善，但通风率仍不足以在整个上课期间维持良好的空气质量。因此，建议改善通风设施。所以，在学校通风设施升级之前，二氧化碳警示装置和教学包是改善当前室内空气质量的有用低成本工具。
