Indoor environmental conditions (thermal, noise, light, and indoor air quality) may affect workers’ comfort, and consequently their health and well-being, as well as their productivity. This study aimed to assess the relations between perceived indoor environment and occupants’ comfort, and to examine the modifying effects of both personal and building characteristics. Within the framework of the European project OFFICAIR, a questionnaire survey was administered to 7441 workers in 167 “modern” office buildings in eight European countries (Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain). Occupants assessed indoor environmental quality (IEQ) using both crude IEQ items (satisfaction with thermal comfort, noise, light, and indoor air quality), and detailed items related to indoor environmental parameters (e.g., too hot/cold temperature, humid/dry air, noise inside/outside, natural/artificial light, odor) of their office environment. Ordinal logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the relations between perceived IEQ and occupants’ comfort. The highest association with occupants’ overall comfort was found for “noise”, followed by “air quality”, “light” and “thermal” satisfaction. Analysis of detailed parameters revealed that “noise inside the buildings” was highly associated with occupants’ overall comfort. “Layout of the offices” was the next parameter highly associated with overall comfort. The relations between IEQ and comfort differed by personal characteristics (gender, age, and the Effort Reward Imbalance index), and building characteristics (office type and building’s location). Workplace design should take into account both occupant and the building characteristics in order to provide healthier and more comfortable conditions to their occupants.

In the European research project OFFICAIR, a procedure was developed to determine associations between characteristics of European offices and health and comfort of office workers, through a checklist and a self-administered questionnaire including environmental, physiological, psychological, and social aspects. This procedure was applied in 167 office buildings in eight European countries (Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece, France, Hungary, the Netherlands, and Finland) during the winter of 2011-2012. About 26 735 survey invitation e-mails were sent, and 7441 office workers were included in the survey. Among respondents who rated an overall comfort less than 4 (23%), 'noise (other than from building systems)', air 'too dry', and temperature 'too variable' were the main complaints selected. An increase of perceived control over indoor climate was positively associated with the perceived indoor environment quality. Almost one-third of office workers suffered from dry eyes and headache in the last 4 weeks. Physical building characteristics were associated with occupants' overall satisfaction (acoustical solutions, mold growth, complaints procedure, cleaning activities) and health (number of occupants, lack of operable windows, presence of carpet and cleaning activities). OFFICAIR project provides a useful database to identify stressors related to indoor environmental quality and office worker's health.

The European project OFFICAIR aimed to broaden the existing knowledge regarding indoor air quality (IAQ) in modern office buildings, i.e., recently built or refurbished buildings. Thirty-seven office buildings participated in the summer campaign (2012), and thirty-five participated in the winter campaign (2012-2013). Four rooms were investigated per building. The target pollutants were twelve volatile organic compounds, seven aldehydes, ozone, nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter <2.5μm (PM). Compared to other studies in office buildings, the benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene concentrations were lower in OFFICAIR buildings, while the α-pinene and d-limonene concentrations were higher, and the aldehyde, nitrogen dioxide and PM concentrations were of the same order of magnitude. When comparing summer and winter, significantly higher concentrations were measured in summer for formaldehyde and ozone, and in winter for benzene, α-pinene, d-limonene, and nitrogen dioxide. The terpene and 2-ethylhexanol concentrations showed heterogeneity within buildings regardless of the season. Considering the average of the summer and winter concentrations, the acetaldehyde and hexanal concentrations tended to increase by 4-5% on average with every floor level increase, and the nitrogen dioxide concentration tended to decrease by 3% on average with every floor level increase. A preliminary evaluation of IAQ in terms of potential irritative and respiratory health effects was performed. The 5-day median and maximum indoor air concentrations of formaldehyde and ozone did not exceed their respective WHO air quality guidelines, and those of acrolein, α-pinene, and d-limonene were lower than their estimated thresholds for irritative and respiratory effects. PM indoor concentrations were higher than the 24-h and annual WHO ambient air quality guidelines.

No abstract

No abstract