|
Sick building syndrome (SBS) describes a cluster of symptoms affecting the eyes, head, nose, throat, and skin, all of which have been attributed to the physical properties of buildings. The symptoms allegedly cause lost productivity and absences. Research has so far, however, failed to identify consistent associations between particular properties of buildings and these symptoms.
British Study Challenges SBS Assumptions
A new British study indicates that while the physical attributes of buildings may have a small influence on such symptoms, they are more strongly associated with job demands, workload, social stress, and lack of support at work than with the physical environment. Found in the March issue of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, a journal published by the British Medical Association, the study examines cross-sectional data on the physical environment of 44 buildings and data from an ongoing health survey of office-based British civil servants.
Study Methodology Isolated Environmental Causes
Ten symptoms usually associated with SBS and psychosocial work stress were evaluated with a self-report questionnaire administered to 4,052 participants aged 42 to 62. (Psychosocial is a way of looking at the mind and body of patients as two important systems that are interlinked; the mind-body connection.) The physical work environment was assessed not only through the self-reported questionnaires, but also through environmental monitoring and inspections. The study attempted to discern associations between symptoms and the physical and psychosocial work environments. There was some suggestion that high levels of symptoms were associated with temperatures outside the recommended range, poor relative humidity, airborne bacteria, and dust. However, lower levels of symptoms were reported in buildings with poor air circulation and unacceptable levels of carbon dioxide, noise, fungus, and volatile organic compounds.
Psychosocial Issues Resulted in Symptoms
The study identified the most significant factors associated with symptoms: high job demands, stress, and low levels of support in the workplace. These factors were significantly and independently associated with higher symptom scores after adjusting for age, sex, and job grade. The association between psychosocial and work stress scales and symptoms was unchanged when physical attributes of the environment were included.
According to the researchers, raised symptom reporting appears to be due less to poor physical conditions than to a working environment characterized by poor psychosocial conditions. Thus, sick building syndrome may be wrongly named. These findings should not be interpreted as justification for assuming that the quality of the physical environment of the workplace is unimportant. The results simply suggest that if sick building syndrome is reported in a building, management should consider causes beyond the physical design and operation of the workplace.
|
 |
