Jaakkola J J, Tuomaala P, Seppänen O
Department of Public Health, University of Helsinki, Finland.
Arch Environ Health. 1994 May-Jun;49(3):175-81. doi: 10.1080/00039896.1994.9940379.
We studied the relation between the amount of textile and other soft fiber wall materials used in the office and the symptoms related to sick building syndrome in two identical, mechanically ventilated, eight-story office buildings. The study population consisted of 400 workers (85% of the source population): 264 males (66%) and 136 females (34%). A self-administered questionnaire inquired about the occurrence of symptoms and related personal and environmental determinants. The office environment was assessed concurrently. Exposure was defined as the surface area of textile or other soft wall material (SWM) in the office. The outcomes were formed using the 7-d prevalences of individual symptoms, including mucosal irritation score (eye irritation, nasal dryness, nasal congestion, pharyngeal irritation); allergic reaction score (eye irritation, nasal congestion, nasal excretion, sneezing); asthma reaction score (wheezing, breathlessness, cough); skin reaction score (dryness, itch, or irritation, rash); and general symptom score (headache, lethargy). In the logistic regression controlling for potential confounders, the adjusted odds ratio for the symptoms of mucosal irritation was 1.82 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 1.14, 2.90) in the low-exposure group, compared with the unexposed reference group; and 2.46 (95% CI = 1.15, 5.28) in the high-exposure group, compared with the reference group. Corresponding odds ratios for the symptoms of allergic reaction were 1.82 (95% CI = 1.14, 2.90) and 3.16 (95% CI = 1.41, 7.09). No difference was found in the risk for asthmatic or skin reactions or general symptoms. The results support a hypothesis that textile and other soft-fiber wall materials used in the office environment are possible determinants of sick building syndrome.
我们在两栋相同的、采用机械通风的八层办公楼中,研究了办公室内使用的纺织物及其他软质纤维墙面材料的用量与建筑物综合征相关症状之间的关系。研究对象包括400名员工(占源人群的85%):264名男性(66%)和136名女性(34%)。通过一份自填式问卷询问症状的发生情况以及相关的个人和环境决定因素。同时对办公环境进行评估。暴露定义为办公室内纺织物或其他软质墙面材料(SWM)的表面积。结果通过个体症状的7天患病率得出,包括黏膜刺激评分(眼部刺激、鼻干、鼻塞、咽部刺激);过敏反应评分(眼部刺激、鼻塞、鼻分泌物、打喷嚏);哮喘反应评分(喘息、呼吸急促、咳嗽);皮肤反应评分(干燥、瘙痒或刺激、皮疹);以及一般症状评分(头痛、乏力)。在控制潜在混杂因素的逻辑回归分析中,与未暴露的参照组相比,低暴露组黏膜刺激症状的调整优势比为1.82(95%置信区间[95%CI]=1.14,2.90);与参照组相比,高暴露组为2.46(95%CI=1.15,5.28)。过敏反应症状的相应优势比分别为1.8(95%CI=1.14,2.90)和3.16(95%CI=1.41,7.09)。哮喘或皮肤反应以及一般症状的风险未发现差异。这些结果支持了一个假设,即办公环境中使用的纺织物及其他软质纤维墙面材料可能是建筑物综合征的决定因素。