Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Sick Building Syndrome”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1992

The role of psychological factors in the report of building-related symptoms in sick building syndrome.

Sick building syndrome (SBS) is an increasingly common problem, although continued skepticism exists regarding its validity. Because of this, the attribution of complaints to psychogenic causes or mas hysteria persists. In this study (N = 111), self-report measures of psychopathology (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory [Hathaway & McKinley, 1983] and SCL-90-R [Derogatis, 1983]) and physical symptom reports failed to discriminate symptomatic from nonsymptomatic workers in an affected building but could more generally differentiate workers in the target building from control subjects. These results suggest that SBS cannot be justifiably attributed to psychological factors alone, although working in a contaminated environment appeared to have deleterious psychological consequences for some workers. Smoking history (in pack/years [packs per day x number of years smoked]) was reliably associated with the development of symptoms in exposed workers. Issues related to the assessment of psychological complaints in SBS are discussed.

Air Pollution, Indoor↗
PubMed1991

Sick building syndrome.

"Sick building syndrome" (SBS) is one of the more colorful terms describing an increasingly common pattern of symptoms found among workers in modern office buildings. Core symptoms include lethargy, mucous membrane irritation, headache, eye irritation, and dry skin. To prompt a diagnosis of SBS, these otherwise common symptoms must be "excessively" reported and primarily "work-related." The World Health Organization now estimates that 30% of new or remodeled office buildings show signs of SBS, and that between 10% and 30% of the occupants of these buildings are affected by SBS. Despite such figures, SBS remains poorly researched and even more poorly understood. The following review provides the clinician an overview of SBS that will allow a more accurate differential diagnosis and will help to prevent the widespread suffering that can accrue when SBS is not quickly recognized.

Air Conditioning↗
PubMed1989

Sick building syndrome.

Sick building syndrome is the recently coined phrase for the multitude of symptoms which office workers may suffer related to their working environment. Management involves a team approach between GPs, the occupational health service and the employer.

Environmental Exposure↗
PubMed2000

Building sickness syndrome in healthy and unhealthy buildings: an epidemiological and environmental assessment with cluster analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Building sickness syndrome remains poorly understood. Aetiological factors range from temperature, humidity, and air movement to internal pollutants, dust, lighting, and noise factors. The reported study was designed to investigate whether relations between symptoms of sick building syndrome and measured environmental factors existed within state of the art air conditioned buildings with satisfactory maintenance programmes expected to provide a healthy indoor environment. METHODS: Five buildings were studied, three of which were state of the art air conditioned buildings. One was a naturally ventilated control building and one a previously studied and known sick building. A questionnaire was administered to the study population to measure the presence of building related symptoms. This was followed by a detailed environmental survey in identified high and low symptom areas within each building. These areas were compared for their environmental performance. RESULTS: Two of the air conditioned buildings performed well with a low prevalence of building related symptoms. Both of these buildings out performed the naturally ventilated building for the low number of symptoms and in many of the environmental measures. One building (C), expected to perform well from a design viewpoint had a high prevalence of symptoms and behaved in a similar manner to the known sick building. Environmental indices associated with symptoms varied from building to building. Consistent associations between environmental variables were found for particulates (itchy eyes, dry throat, headache, and lethargy) across all buildings. There were persisting relations between particulates and symptoms (headache, lethargy, and dry skin) even in the building with the lowest level of symptoms and of measured airborne particulates (building B). There were also consistent findings for noise variables with low frequency noise being directly associated with symptoms (stuffy nose, itchy eyes, and dry skin) and higher frequency noise being relatively protective across all buildings. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first epidemiological study of expected state of the art, air conditioned buildings. These buildings can produce an internal environment better than that of naturally ventilated buildings for both reported symptoms and environmental variables. The factors associated with symptoms varied widely across the different buildings studied although consistent associations for symptoms were found with increased exposure to particulates and low frequency noise.

Adult↗
PubMed1990

Indoor air quality and personal factors related to the sick building syndrome.

The "sick building syndrome" involves symptoms such as eye, skin and upper airway irritation, headache, and fatigue. A multifactorial study was performed among personnel in consecutive cases of sick buildings to investigate relationships between such symptoms, exposure to environmental factors, and personal factors. The total indoor hydrocarbon concentration was significantly related to symptoms. Other indoor exposures such as room temperature, air humidity, and formaldehyde or carbon dioxide concentration did not correlate with the symptoms. Personal factors such as reported hyperreactivity and sick leave due to airway diseases were strongly related to the sick building syndrome. Other factors associated with the sick building syndrome were smoking, psychosocial factors, and experience of static electricity at work. Neither atopy, age, sex, nor outdoor exposures correlated significantly with the number of symptoms. It was concluded that the sick building syndrome is of multifactorial origin and related to both indoor hydrocarbon exposure and individual factors.

Air Pollutants↗
PubMed1994

Building components contributors of the sick building syndrome.

The sick building syndrome has been widely discussed from epidemiological perspectives. Although there is considerable difference in opinion regarding the concrete and objective evidence to support a distinct sick building syndrome and/or building-related illness, much data indicates that numerous variables within buildings can potentially influence human health. In this paper, we discuss in detail not only the potential and unique infectious diseases caused by Legionella, Pontiac fever, Q fever, and influenza, but also the data implicating noninfectious etiologies of sick building syndrome and building-related illnesses. In addition, the role of psychological factors, mass hysteria, and indoor pollution is discussed with respect to the nature of associations between exposure and symptoms. Finally, comparisons are made in different building construction types of old versus new buildings to highlight changes in modern construction that may have led to a putative increase in work-related symptomatology.

Air Pollution, Indoor↗
PubMed1992

An investigation of the relationship between microbial and particulate indoor air pollution and the sick building syndrome.

The sick building syndrome has been the subject of research for approximately 10 years. Although it is often suggested that symptoms in office workers are due to circulating micro-organisms or particles, epidemiological studies investigating the relationship between them have been lacking. This cross-sectional study has combined medical and aerobiological assessments of offices in Great Britain and has found that, although airborne particulates and micro-organisms are unlikely to be the sole cause of the sick building syndrome, positive associations between symptom prevalence rates and levels of airborne viable bacteria and fungi within groups of buildings with similar ventilation systems, suggest a possible causal link that should be explored.

Air Microbiology↗
PubMed1997

Sick-building syndrome.

Sick-building syndrome (SBS) is an increasingly common problem. Although objective physiological abnormalities are not generally found and permanent sequelae are rare, the symptoms of SBS can be uncomfortable, even disabling, and whole workplaces can be rendered non-functional. In assessment of patients with SBS complaints, specific building-related illnesses suggested by history or physical examination should be ruled out. On-site assessment of buildings is extremely useful. Treatment involves both the patient and the building. Whenever possible, changes such as ventilation improvements and reduction of sources of environmental contamination should be initiated even if specific aetiological agents have not been identified.

Air Pollution, Indoor↗
PubMed1994

Epidemiology of the sick building syndrome.

The sick building syndrome (SBS) has been the subject of serious scientific inquiry only in the past 10 years. It is commonly accepted to represent eye, nose, and throat irritation; headaches, lethargy, difficulty concentrating, and sometimes dizziness; nausea, chest tightness; and other symptoms. Evidence suggests that what is called the SBS is at least three separate entities, each of which has at least one cause. This review will summarize the epidemiologic investigations of the SBS and present an overview of etiologic hypotheses.

Air Pollution, Indoor↗
PubMed1993

The effect of varying levels of outdoor-air supply on the symptoms of sick building syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The sick building syndrome is the term given to a constellation of symptoms reported by workers in modern office buildings, hypothesized to occur when the supply of outdoor air is reduced, because of the accumulation of contaminants arising from within the building. We undertook this study to determine the effect of changing the supply of outdoor air in four office buildings on the symptoms reported by workers and their perception of the indoor environment. METHODS: Within each of three consecutive two-week blocks, the ventilation systems in each building were manipulated, in random order, to deliver to the indoor environment an intended 20 or 50 ft3 (0.57 or 1.4 m3) of outdoor air per minute per person for one week at a time. Each week, the participants, unaware of the experimental intervention, reported symptoms and the indoor environment was thoroughly evaluated. RESULTS: Of 1838 eligible workers in the four buildings, 1546 (84 percent) participated in the study. The supply of outdoor air averaged 7 percent and 32 percent in the ventilation systems and 30 and 64 ft3 (0.85 and 1.8 m3) per minute per person in the work sites at the lower and higher ventilation levels, respectively. These changes in the supply of outdoor air were not associated with changes in the participants' ratings of the office environment or in symptom frequency (crude odds ratio, 1.0; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.9 to 1.1). After work-site measures of ventilation, temperature, humidity, and air velocity were included in the regression analysis, the adjusted odds ratio was also 1.0 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.8 to 1.2). CONCLUSIONS: Increases in the supply of outdoor air did not appear to affect workers' perceptions of their office environment or their reporting of symptoms considered typical of the sick building syndrome.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Sick building syndrome: acute illness among office workers--the role of building ventilation, airborne contaminants and work stress.

Outbreaks of acute illness among office workers have been reported with increasing frequency during the past 10-15 years. In the majority of cases, hazardous levels of airborne contaminants have not been found. Generally, health complaints have involved mucous membrane and respiratory tract irritation and nonspecific symptoms such as headache and fatigue. Except for rare examples of hypersensitivity pneumonitis related to microbiologic antigens, there have been no reports of serious morbidity or permanent sequelae. However, the anxiety, lost work time, decreased productivity and resources spent in investigating complaints has been substantial. NIOSH has reported on 446 Health Hazards Evaluations that were done in response to indoor air complaints. This data base is the source of most of the published accounts of building-related illness. Their results are summarized here with a discussion of common pollutants (tobacco smoke, formaldehyde, other organic volatiles), and the limitations of the available industrial hygiene and epidemiologic data. There has been one large scale epidemiologic survey of symptoms among office workers. The results associate risk of symptoms to building design and characteristics of the heating/air-conditioning systems, consistent with the NIOSH experience. Building construction since the 1970s has utilized energy conservation measures such as improved insulation, reduced air exchange, and construction without opening windows. These buildings are considered "airtight" and are commonly involved in episodes of building-associated illness in which no specific etiologic agent can be identified. After increasing the percentage of air exchange or correcting specific deficiencies found in the heating/air-conditioning systems, the health complaints often resolve, hence, the term "tight building syndrome" or "sick building syndrome."(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Acute Disease↗
PubMed1991

Sick-building syndrome.

The sick-building syndrome (SBS) is defined as the occurrence of an excessive number of subjective complaints by the occupants of a building. These complaints include headache, irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat, lethargy, inability to concentrate, objectionable odors, and less frequently, nausea, dizziness, chest tightness, etc. These complaints will always be reported by a fraction of the occupants of any building if a questionnaire is administered that asks the respondent to recall any subjective symptoms they remember having had in the last 2 weeks or or over some period of time. It is often considered that SBS symptom reports have a minimum prevalence of about 15 to 20% for a 2-week recall period. SBS symptoms reported by 30% or more of occupants are indicative of conditions in the building environment that warrant attention. It is not often that a clear, single cause is responsible for the excess symptom reports. The following factors, often in combinations, are seen to contribute to SBS: outdoor air supply that is inadequate, ventilation distribution or effectiveness that is inadequate, the presence of temporary or long-term sources of contaminants such as tobacco smoke, adhesives, composite materials such as chipboard, and the growth of microorganisms in the HVAC equipment or in carpets or other furnishings. Depending on which causes contribute, the condition may be intermittent or even temporary. Psychosocial factors such as labor-management relations and satisfaction or dissatisfaction with other factors in the work environment can have a profound influence on the level of response of the occupants to their environment. Although hard data are difficult to collect, it is likely that productivity in the office environment is sensitive to conditions causing SBS.

Air Pollution, Indoor↗
PubMedDate not supplied

[The sick building syndrome].

The term "sick building syndrome" (SBS) has been used for several years to describe a number of mostly unspecific complaints of some occupants of air-conditioned buildings. Based on the literature, a definition of the SBS is given and some results of larger SBS studies carried out in Germany, Denmark and the United Kingdom are described. These studies show that SBS is a multifactorial event which may include physical, chemical, biological as well as psychological factors. In many cases, the occurrence of SBS in a building is due to insufficient maintenance of the HVAC system. SBS-induced investigations in a building should be carried out stepwise, the measurement of indoor air pollutants not being the first step. Strategies to avoid SBS must take into account factors specific to the building, the HVAC system and the equipment as well as psychological factors.

Air Microbiology↗
PubMedDate not supplied

The sick-building syndrome.

The sick-building syndrome is a poorly defined term whose use should be discontinued. In the majority of cases, engineering problems and pollutant sources can be identified that contribute to the generation of complaints. Although psychosocial factors are likely to exacerbate underlying complaints, they should not distract from identifying solutions.

Air Pollutants↗
PubMed1998

The sick building syndrome: a diagnostic dilemma.

Sick building syndrome (SBS) is usually defined as an increased occurrence of non-specific symptoms among populations in determined buildings. This definition differs from those of other medical syndromes in that it refers to a system (a building inclusive of its population) rather than to a clinical state in a single individual. Such a definition should make the term SBS impossible to use as a diagnosis applied to individual persons. In spite of this, it is often used in this way, and the aim of the article is to discuss problems with this practice. It is a case study based on an office building with long-standing building-related health problems. Information concerning the building and its inhabitants comes from a large number of separate documentary sources. The study demonstrates that the diagnostic use of SBS suffers from serious weaknesses. It is proposed that such diagnostics could even have a normative force serving to maintain and reinforce building-related, non-specific health problems. It is therefore suggested that the term sick building syndrome should be abandoned.

Absenteeism↗
PubMed1999

The sick building syndrome.

The phenomenon of 'sick building syndrome' is associated with several factors rather than a single readily and directly observable cause and various symptoms and behaviours rather than one clinical syndrome. Like another modern occupational ill health problem--repetitive strain injury--its existence may be questioned or doubted by the employers of staff who work in modern buildings. This article looks at what makes a building sick and how a sick building can affect its occupants. It guides staff in the recognition of the syndrome and suggests ways to reduce the risks of working in a building whose poor design or maintenance constitutes a hazard for occupants.

Environmental Exposure↗