Improving the Health of Workers in Indoor Environments: Priority Research Needs for a National Occupational Research Agenda

Abstract

Indoor nonindustrial work environments were designated a priority research area through the nationwide stakeholder process that created the National Occupational Research Agenda. A multidisciplinary research team used member consensus and quantitative estimates, with extensive external review, to develop a specific research agenda. The team outlined the following priority research topics: building-influenced communicable respiratory infections, building-related asthma/allergic diseases, and nonspecific building-related symptoms; indoor environmental science; and methods for increasing implementation of healthful building practices. Available data suggest that improving building environments may result in health benefits for more than 15 million of the 89 million US indoor workers, with estimated economic benefits of $5 to $75 billion annually. Research on these topics, requiring new collaborations and resources, offers enormous potential health and economic returns.

Effect of key parameters on the photocatalytic oxidation of toluene at low concentrations in air under 254+185nm UV irradiation

“…These pollutants reduce indoor air quality in residential and commercial buildings, and have been associated to a high incidence of asthma, allergies and building-related symptoms (BRS) [1,2]. Air cleaning technologies that rely on UV photocatalytic oxidation (UVPCO) can eliminate VOCs and have the potential to significantly improve indoor air quality and to maintain acceptable pollutant levels with reduced outdoor air supply and concomitant ventilation energy savings.…”

Indoor pollutants emitted by office equipment: A review of reported data and information needs

“…As summarized below, office equipment has been found to be a source of ozone, particles, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs). Among the chemicals emitted by office equipment are VOCs and SVOCs that have been associated with occupational symptoms such as eye, nose or throat irritation, headache and fatigue (Mendell et al 2002;Wolkoff et al 2006).The widespread and growing use of office equipment by a large fraction of the population in their workplaces, homes, and schools and the incomplete and fragmented evidence of this equipment as a source of health-relevant indoor air pollutants provide compelling arguments for a systematic evaluation of pollutant emissions. Since distributed desktop computers and associated displays are in close proximity to people, research on pollutant emissions from office equipment logically should emphasize distributed equipment rather than large central units.…”

Changing ventilation rates in U.S. offices: Implications for health, work performance, energy, and associated economics

“…We note that SBS symptoms sometimes lead to lawsuits and expensive investigations and the benefits of avoiding these lawsuits and investigations are not included in our analyses. Also, there is some evidence that SBS symptoms reduce work performance [17,18], another factor not considered in this paper but important to address in future research.…”

“…Mendell [18] estimated annual potential savings of $4 to $70 billion from measures that reduced SBS symptoms in U.S. workers, but their estimates assumed that reduced SBS symptoms led to improved work performance while the current analysis considers only the health care costs for SBS symptoms. Mendell [18] also estimated $3 to $4 billion in annual savings due to reductions in communicable respiratory illnesses in U.S. workers.…”

“…Mendell [18] estimated annual potential savings of $4 to $70 billion from measures that reduced SBS symptoms in U.S. workers, but their estimates assumed that reduced SBS symptoms led to improved work performance while the current analysis considers only the health care costs for SBS symptoms. Mendell [18] also estimated $3 to $4 billion in annual savings due to reductions in communicable respiratory illnesses in U.S. workers. Fisk [20] used the same basic approach as this paper to estimate the benefits of increasing VRs, but for a different set of scenarios in which the starting point was an estimate of the distribution of existing VRs in the office buildings stock.…”