Jaakkola J J, Miettinen P
Department of Epidemiology, National Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Am J Epidemiol. 1995 Apr 15;141(8):755-65. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a117498.
To examine the role of types of building ventilation in office buildings as a determinant of ocular, nasopharyngeal, skin, and general symptoms often denoted as the sick building syndrome, a cross-sectional study was carried out in March 1991 on 2,678 workers from 41 office buildings selected randomly from the Helsinki metropolitan area. The ventilation type and other characteristics of these buildings were recorded on a site visit, and a questionnaire directed to workers inquired about the symptoms, perceived air quality, and possible personal and environmental determinants (response rate, 81%). The outcomes were weekly work-related symptoms experienced during the previous 12 months and symptom groups defined either by their anatomic location or hypothesized mechanism. In logistic regression analysis adjusting for potential confounders, simple mechanical ventilation (mechanical supply and exhaust ducts) was related to a higher risk of ocular symptoms (odds ratio (OR) = 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-2.26), nasal congestion (OR = 1.78, 95% CI 0.92-3.42) and discharge (OR = 1.44, 95% CI 0.72-2.88), pharyngeal symptoms (OR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.01-5.33), and lethargy (OR = 1.71, 95% CI 0.99-2.95) compared with natural ventilation. Air conditioning was related to a slightly higher risk of symptoms compared with simple mechanical ventilation (for any symptom, OR = 1.30, 95% CI 1.00-1.68). Steam and evaporative humidification as well as air recirculation acted also as determinants of these symptoms. The risk of the studied symptoms is related to the type of ventilation in the existing office building stock. Future studies should explore the typical functional problems and specific causes connected with the high-risk ventilation systems.
为研究办公楼建筑通风类型作为眼部、鼻咽部、皮肤及一般症状(常被称为“病态建筑综合征”)决定因素的作用,1991年3月对从赫尔辛基大都市区随机选取的41栋办公楼中的2678名工人进行了一项横断面研究。在实地考察时记录了这些建筑的通风类型及其他特征,并向工人发放问卷,询问症状、感知空气质量以及可能的个人和环境决定因素(回复率为81%)。研究结果为前12个月每周与工作相关的症状,以及根据解剖位置或假定机制定义的症状组。在对潜在混杂因素进行调整的逻辑回归分析中,与自然通风相比,简单机械通风(机械送风和排风管道)与眼部症状(比值比(OR)=1.31,95%置信区间(CI)0.76 - 2.26)、鼻塞(OR = 1.78,95%CI 0.92 - 3.42)和流涕(OR = 1.44,95%CI 0.72 - 2.88)、咽部症状(OR = 2.32,95%CI 1.01 - 5.33)以及嗜睡(OR = 1.71,95%CI 0.99 - 2.95)的较高风险相关。与简单机械通风相比,空调与症状的风险略高相关(对于任何症状,OR = 1.30,95%CI 1.00 - 1.68)。蒸汽和蒸发式加湿以及空气再循环也是这些症状的决定因素。所研究症状的风险与现有办公楼存量中的通风类型有关。未来的研究应探索与高风险通风系统相关的典型功能问题和具体原因。