[Risk factor for lifestyle and way of living for symptoms of sick building syndrome: epidemiological survey in Japan].
ABSTRACT To investigate the association among symptoms of sick building syndrome (SBS). Self-reported questionnaire and indoor environmental surveys of newly build dwellings in Japan were conducted.
The questionnaire included items on symptoms of SBS and lifestyle, and an indoor environmental survey (i.e., mold, mites, and volatile organic compounds (VOC)) was conducted in family rooms of dwellings in Japan (Sapporo, Fukushima, Nagoya, Osaka, Okayama, and Kitakyusyu), from 2004 to 2007.
Data from Osaka in 2004 indicated significant odds ratios for symptoms of SBS for questionnaire items on renovation, air freshener, carpet, use of benzin, use of thinner, use of coating materials, moldiness, smell of house, and feeling of having insufficient sleeping hours. Significant odds ratios were noted for total CFU, Auerbasidum genus, Alternaria alternata, Aspergillus sp., Aureobasidium pullulans, Cladosporium cladosporioides, Fusarium sp., Penicillium sp., Rhodotorula minuta, and Wallemia sebi. Concerning concentrations of VOCs, TVOC, limonene, o,m-tolualdehyde, 2-pentanone, tetrachloroethylene, n-decane, and n-heptane are significantly higher in those who have symptoms of SBS. Significant odds ratios were indicated for questionnaire items on smell of house, stuffiness, moldiness, fustiness, dampness, water leakage, and feeling of having insufficient sleeping hours from data of six areas in Japan in 2004. Continuous data analysis of Osaka from 2004 to 2006 suggested that improvement of symptoms of SBS might be due to lifestyle modification.
Mites, molds, VOCs, renovation, moldiness, stuffiness, feeling of having insufficient sleeping hours, carpet use, benzin, thinner, and coating materials, increase the risk of developing symptoms of SBS, whereas modification of lifestyle and ways of living factors might alleviate them.
SourceAvailable from: Baizhan Li[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The prevalence and risk factors of sick building syndrome (SBS) symptoms in domestic environments were studied by a questionnaire survey on the home environment. Parents of 5299 3-6 years old children from randomly selected kindergartens in Chongqing, China returned completed questionnaires between December 2010 and April 2011. The prevalence of parents’ SBS symptoms (often (every week) compared with never) were: 11.4% for general symptoms, 7.1% for mucosal symptoms and 4.4% for skin symptoms. Multiple logistic regressions were applied controlling for gender and asthma/allergic rhinitis/eczema. Living near a main road or highway was a strong risk factor for general symptoms (adjusted odds ratio, aOR=2.16, P<0.001), skin symptoms (aOR=2.69, P<0.001), and mucosal symptoms (aOR=1.63, P<0.01). Redecoration was a risk factor for general symptoms (aOR=2.00, P<0.001), skin symptoms (aOR=1.66, P<0.01), and mucosal symptoms (aOR=1.66, P<0.05). New furniture was a risk factor for general symptoms (aOR=2.16, P<0.001) and skin symptoms (aOR=1.67, P<0.01). Dampness related problems (mould spot, damp stain, water damage and condensation) were all risk factors for SBS symptoms, as was the presence of cockroaches, rats, and mosquitoes/flies and use of incense. Protective factors include cleaning the child’s bedroom every day and frequently exposing bedding to sunshine. In conclusion, adults’ SBS symptoms were related to factors of the home environment.Chinese Science Bulletin 12/2013; 58(34). DOI:10.1007/s11434-013-5814-2 · 1.37 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study assessed subjective symptoms related to indoor concentrations of chemicals among residents in a housing estate in Dalian, China, where indoor air pollution by interior decoration materials has recently become a major health problem. Fifty-nine males and 50 females were surveyed for their symptoms related to sick building syndrome. Formaldehyde (HCHO), NO2, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in their dwellings were collected using a diffusion sampler and measured by GC/MS. For residents with one or more symptoms in the past, HCHO, butanol or 1,2-dichloroethane concentrations were significantly greater in their bedrooms or kitchens compared with those of subjects without previous symptoms. For residents with one or more symptoms at the time of the study, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, xylene, butanol, methyl isobutyl ketone, and styrene concentrations in their bedrooms or kitchens were significantly greater compared with those of residents without symptoms. HCHO, NO2, and VOCs were detected in all rooms, but their levels were lower than the guideline values except for HCHO in two rooms. Chemical substances from interior decoration materials at indoor air levels lower than their guideline values might have affected the health status of residents.International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 01/2013; 10(4):1489-504. DOI:10.3390/ijerph10041489 · 1.99 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To determine whether indoor chemicals act as possible environmental risk factors responsible for sick building syndrome (SBS)-related symptoms in new houses (<6 years old) in Japan, we studied 871 people living in 260 single-family houses in 2004 and 2005. We measured the indoor concentrations of aldehydes and volatile organic compounds and longitudinal changes in the living rooms over two consecutive years. Participants answered standardized questionnaires on SBS symptoms and lifestyle habits. Approximately 14% and 12% of subjects were identified as having SBS in the first and second year, respectively. According to analysis adjusted for sex, age, smoking, and allergic diseases, increases in aldehydes and aliphatic hydrocarbons contributed to the occurrence of SBS. Elevated levels of indoor aldehydes and aliphatic hydrocarbons increased the possible risk of SBS in residents living in new houses, indicating that source controls against indoor chemicals are needed to counter SBS.Science of The Total Environment 02/2012; 417-418:61-7. DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.12.060 · 3.16 Impact Factor