Advertisement

Symptoms in relation to chemicals and dampness in newly built dwellings

  • Y. SaijoEmail author
  • R. Kishi
  • F. Sata
  • Y. Katakura
  • Y. Urashima
  • A. Hatakeyama
  • S. Kobayashi
  • K. Jin
  • N. Kurahashi
  • T. Kondo
  • Y. Y. Gong
  • T. Umemura
Original Article

Abstract

Objectives: As the airtightness of dwellings has recently increased, problems associated with indoor air pollution and dampness have become important environmental health issues. The aim of this study was to clarify whether symptoms in residents living in newly built dwellings were related to chemicals and dampness. Methods: Symptoms of 317 residents were surveyed by standardized questionnaires, and the concentrations of formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and 17 volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in their homes were measured. Dampness (condensation on window panes and/or walls, and mold growth) was identified by questionnaires given to the householders or their partners. Results: Some VOCs (toluene, butyl acetate, ethylbenzene, alpha-pinene, p-dichlorobenzene, nonanal, and xylene) were significantly related to the symptoms, and the sum of all VOCs (all identified VOCs) was significantly related to throat and respiratory symptoms [odds ratio (OR) for eye symptoms =2.4; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0–5.5], although the concentrations of VOCs were relatively low. As for the dampness index, condensation on window panes and/or walls was related to all symptoms, and mold growth was related to all symptoms except skin, throat and respiratory and general symptoms. As the number of dampness signs increased, the ORs increased for the symptoms except general symptoms (OR for nose symptoms = 4.4, 95% CI 1.6–11.9). Conclusion: Both VOCs and dampness were significantly related to symptoms. We should take measures to reduce the concentrations of VOCs, dampness and microbial growth in dwellings.

Keywords

Volatile organic compounds Formaldehyde Dampness Symptoms Dwelling Sick building syndrome (SBS) 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to K. Kumagai, S. Nakai, and Y. Yanagisawa for measuring the levels of aldehydes and VOCs, and to J. Tamaki, S. Kasai, S. Kato, E. Hayashi, E. Sakakura, K. Ishihara, and M. Soma for helping to visit the dwellings. This work was supported, in part, by a Health Science Research Grant from the Japan Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare.

References

  1. Andersson K, Bakke JV, Bjorseth O, Bornehag CG, Clausen G, Hongslo JK, Kjellman M, Kjaergaard S, Levy F, Molhave L, Skerfving S, Sundell J (1997a) TVOC and health in non-industrial indoor environments. Indoor Air 7:78–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson MA, Nikulin M, Koljalg U, Andersson MC, Rainey F, Reijula K, Hintikka EL, Salkinoja-Salonen M (1997b) Bacteria, molds, and toxins in water-damaged building materials. Appl Environ Microbiol 63:387–393PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bachmann MO, Myers JE (1995) Influences on sick building syndrome symptoms in three buildings. Soc Sci Med 40:245–251CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Black DW, Doebbeling BN, Voelker MD, Clarke WR, Woolson RF, Barrett DH, Schwartz DA (1999) Quality of life and health-services utilization in a population-based sample of military personnel reporting multiple chemical sensitivities. J Occup Environ Med 41:928–933CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Brunekreef B (1992) Damp housing and adult respiratory symptoms. Allergy 47:498–502PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Engvall K, Norrby C, Norback D (2001a) Sick building syndrome in relation to building dampness in multi-family residential buildings in Stockholm. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 74:270–278CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Engvall K, Norrby C, Norback D (2001b) Asthma symptoms in relation to building dampness and odour in older multifamily houses in Stockholm. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 5:468–477PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Garrett MH, Hooper BM, Hooper MA (1998) Indoor environmental factors associated with house-dust-mite allergen (Der p 1) levels in south-eastern Australian houses. Allergy 53:1060–1065PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Gilbert AN, Knasko SC, Sabini J (1997) Sex differences in task performance associated with attention to ambient odor. Arch Environ Health 52:195–199PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Haverinen U, Husman T, Vahteristo M, Koskinen O, Moschandreas D, Nevalainen A, Pekkanen J (2001) Comparison of two-level and three-level classifications of moisture-damaged dwellings in relation to health effects. Indoor Air 11:192–199CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Hayashi T (1985) A study on the causes of an epidemic of influenza, especially an analysis of relative humidity as a main cause (in Japanese). Nippon Ika Daigaku Zasshi 52:272–280PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Hirsch T, Range U, Walther KU, Hederer B, Lassig S, Frey G, Leupold W (1998) Prevalence and determinants of house dust mite allergen in East German homes. Clin Exp Allergy 28:956–964CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Hodgsin M (2000) Sick building syndrome. Occup Med 15:571–585PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hodgson MJ, Frohliger J, Permar E, Tidwell C, Traven ND, Olenchock SA, Karpf M (1991) Symptoms and microenvironmental measures in nonproblem buildings. J Occup Med 33:527–533PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Hodgson M, Levin H, Wolkoff P (1994) Volatile organic compounds and indoor air. J Allergy Clin Immunol 94:296–303PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Koskinen OM, Husman TM, Meklin TM, Nevalainen AI (1999) The relationship between moisture or mould observations in houses and the state of health of their occupants. Eur Respir J 14:1363–1367CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Kostiainen R (1995) Volatile organic compounds in the indoor air of normal and sick houses. Atmospheric Environ 29:693–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lehmann I, Rehwagen M, Diez U, Seiffart A, Rolle-Kampczyk U, Richter M, Wetzig H, Borte M, Herbarth O, Leipzig Allergy Risk Children Study (2001) Enhanced in vivo IgE production and T cell polarization toward the type 2 phenotype in association with indoor exposure to VOC: results of the LARS study. Int J Hyg Environ Health 204:211–221PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Main DM, Hogan TJ (1983) Health effects of low-level exposure to formaldehyde. J Occup Med 25:896–900PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. McKeown-Eyssen GE, Baines CJ, Marshall LM, Jazmaji V, Sokoloff ER (2001) Multiple chemical sensitivity: discriminant validity of case definitions. Arch Environ Health 56:406–412PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Menzies D, Bourbeau J (1997) Building-related illnesses. N Engl J Med 337:1524–1531CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Menzies, D, Tamblyn RM, Nunes F, Hanley J, Tamblyn RT (1996) Exposure to varying levels of contaminants and symptoms among workers in two office buildings. Am J Public Health 86:1629–1633PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Mizoue T, Reijula K, Andersson K (2001) Environmental tobacco smoke exposure and overtime work as risk factors for sick building syndrome in Japan. Am J Epidemiol 154:803–808CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Molhave L (1992) Controlled experiments for studies of the sick building syndrome. Ann N Y Acad Sci 641:46–55PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Molhave L, Krzyzanowski M (2003) The right to healthy indoor air: status by 2002. Indoor Air 13 [Suppl 6]:50–53CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Munir AK (1998) Mite sensitization in the Scandinavian countries and factors influencing exposure levels. Allergy 53 [Suppl 48]:64–70PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Norback D, Michel I, Widstrom J (1990a) Indoor air quality and personal factors related to the sick building syndrome. Scand J Work Environ Health 16:121–128PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Norback D, Torgen M, Edling C (1990b) Volatile organic compounds, respirable dust, and personal factors related to prevalence and incidence of sick building syndrome in primary schools. Br J Ind Med 47:733–741PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Norback D, Bjornsson E, Janson C, Widstrom J, Boman G (1995) Asthmatic symptoms and volatile organic compounds, formaldehyde, and carbon dioxide in dwellings. Occup Environ Med 52:388–395PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Platt SD, Martin CJ, Hunt SM, Lewis CW (1989) Damp housing, mould growth, and symptomatic health state. BMJ 298:1673–1678PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Redlich CA, Sparer J, Cullem MR (1997) Sick-building syndrome. Lancet 349:1013–1016CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Rylander R (1999) Indoor air-related effects and airborne (1-3)-beta-D-glucan. Environ Health Perspect 107 [Suppl 3]:501–503Google Scholar
  33. Saijo Y, Reiko K, Sata F, Katakura Y, Urashima Y, Hatakeyama A, Mukaihara N, Kobayashi S, Jin K, Iikura Y (2002) Symptoms of sick house syndrome and its contributing factors: study of general dwellings in Hokkaido (in Japanese, English abstract). Jpn J Public Health 49:1169–1183Google Scholar
  34. Sakaguchi J, Akabayashi S (2003) Field survey of indoor air quality in detached houses in Niigata Prefecture. Indoor Air 13:42–49CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Salvaggio JE (1994) Psychological aspects of “environmental illness,” “multiple chemical sensitivity,” and building-related illness. J Allergy Clin Immunol 94:366–370PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Schneider T, Sundell J, Bischof W, Bohgard M, Cherrie JW, Clausen PA, Dreborg S, Kildeso J, Kaergaard SK, Lovik M, Pasanen P, Skyberg K (2003) ‘EUROPART’. Airborne particles in the indoor environment. A European interdisciplinary review of scientific evidence on associations between exposure to particles in buildings and health effects. Indoor Air 13:38–48CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Shinohara N, Kumagai K, Yamamoto N, Yanagisawa Y, Fujii M, Yamasaki A (2004) Field validation of an active sampling cartridge as a passive sampler for long-term carbonyl monitoring. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 54:419–424PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Shinohara N, Mizukoshi A, Yanagisawa Y (2003) Identification of responsible volatile chemicals that induce hypersensitive reactions to multiple chemical sensitivity patients. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol 14:84–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stenberg B, Eriksson N, Hoog J, Sundell J, Wall S (1994) The sick building syndrome (SBS) in office workers. A case-referent study of personal, psychosocial and building-related risk indicators. Int J Epidemiol 23:1190–1197PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Torii S (2002) Sick house syndrome (in Japanese). Nippon Rinsho 60 [Suppl 1]:621–627Google Scholar
  41. Waegemaekers M, Van Wageningen N, Brunekreef B, Boleij JS (1989) Respiratory symptoms in damp homes. A pilot study. Allergy 44:192–198Google Scholar
  42. Wessen B, Schoeps KO (1996) Microbial volatile organic compounds—what substances can be found in sick buildings? Analyst 121:1203–1205CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Wieslander G, Norback D, Nordstrom K, Walinder R, Venge P (1999) Nasal and ocular symptoms, tear film stability and biomarkers in nasal lavage, in relation to building-dampness and building design in hospitals. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 72:451–461CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Yasueda H (1997) Quantification of dermatophagoides mite allergens by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (in Japanese, English abstract). Skin research 39:88–92Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Y. Saijo
    • 1
    Email author
  • R. Kishi
    • 1
  • F. Sata
    • 1
  • Y. Katakura
    • 1
  • Y. Urashima
    • 2
  • A. Hatakeyama
    • 2
  • S. Kobayashi
    • 3
  • K. Jin
    • 3
  • N. Kurahashi
    • 1
  • T. Kondo
    • 1
  • Y. Y. Gong
    • 1
  • T. Umemura
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Public HeathHokkaido University Graduate School of MedicineSapporoJapan
  2. 2.Sapporo City Public Health OfficeSappporoJapan
  3. 3.Hokkaido Institute of Public HealthSapporoJapan

Personalised recommendations