Literature DB >> 21306437

Effects of thermal discomfort in an office on perceived air quality, SBS symptoms, physiological responses, and human performance.

L Lan1, P Wargocki, D P Wyon, Z Lian.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: The effects of thermal discomfort on health and human performance were investigated in an office, in an attempt to elucidate the physiological mechanisms involved. Twelve subjects (six men and six women) performed neurobehavioral tests and tasks typical of office work while thermally neutral (at 22°C) and while warm (at 30°C). Multiple physiological measurements and subjective assessment were made. The results show that when the subjects felt warm, they assessed the air quality to be worse, reported increased intensity of many sick building syndrome symptoms, expressed more negative mood, and were less willing to exert effort. Task performance decreased when the subjects felt warm. Their heart rate, respiratory ventilation, and end-tidal partial pressure of carbon dioxide increased significantly, and their arterial oxygen saturation decreased. Tear film quality was found to be significantly reduced at the higher temperature when they felt warm. No effects were observed on salivary biomarkers (alpha-amylase and cortisol). The present results imply that the negative effects on health and performance that occur when people feel thermally warm at raised temperatures are caused by physiological mechanisms. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: This study indicates to what extent elevated temperatures and thermal discomfort because of warmth result in negative effects on health and performance and shows that these could be caused by physiological responses to warmth, not by the distraction of subjective discomfort. This implies that they will occur independently of discomfort, i.e. even if subjects have become adaptively habituated to subjective discomfort. The findings make it possible to estimate the negative economic consequences of reducing energy use in buildings in cases where this results in elevated indoor temperatures. They show clearly that thermal discomfort because of raised temperatures should be avoided in workplaces.
© 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21306437     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0668.2011.00714.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indoor Air        ISSN: 0905-6947            Impact factor:   5.770


  13 in total

1.  Changes in EEG signals during the cognitive activity at varying air temperature and relative humidity.

Authors:  Minghui Zhu; Weiwei Liu; Pawel Wargocki
Journal:  J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol       Date:  2019-06-24       Impact factor: 5.563

2.  A new agent for derivatizing carbonyl species used to investigate limonene ozonolysis.

Authors:  J R Wells; Jason E Ham
Journal:  Atmos Environ (1994)       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 4.798

3.  Perceived air quality and particulate matter pollution based on field survey data during a winter period.

Authors:  Katerina Pantavou; Basil Psiloglou; Spyridon Lykoudis; Anastasios Mavrakis; Georgios K Nikolopoulos
Journal:  Int J Biometeorol       Date:  2018-10-26       Impact factor: 3.787

4.  Certain personal and environmental factors as predictors of thermal sensation perceived by a population of students in a university setting from Timisoara, Romania: a case study.

Authors:  Cristina I Petrescu
Journal:  Environ Health Prev Med       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 3.674

Review 5.  Thermoelectric Materials for Textile Applications.

Authors:  Kony Chatterjee; Tushar K Ghosh
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2021-05-25       Impact factor: 4.411

6.  School environment as predictor of teacher sick leave: data-linked prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Jenni Ervasti; Mika Kivimäki; Ichiro Kawachi; S V Subramanian; Jaana Pentti; Tuula Oksanen; Riikka Puusniekka; Tiina Pohjonen; Jussi Vahtera; Marianna Virtanen
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2012-09-11       Impact factor: 3.295

7.  Prediction of Human Performance Using Electroencephalography under Different Indoor Room Temperatures.

Authors:  Tapsya Nayak; Tinghe Zhang; Zijing Mao; Xiaojing Xu; Lin Zhang; Daniel J Pack; Bing Dong; Yufei Huang
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2018-04-23

8.  Impact of Indoor Physical Environment on Learning Efficiency in Different Types of Tasks: A 3 × 4 × 3 Full Factorial Design Analysis.

Authors:  Lilin Xiong; Xiao Huang; Jie Li; Peng Mao; Xiang Wang; Rubing Wang; Meng Tang
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2018-06-13       Impact factor: 3.390

9.  From Office Environmental Stressors to Work Performance: The Role of Work Patterns.

Authors:  Aida Soriano; Malgorzata W Kozusznik; Jose M Peiró
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2018-08-02       Impact factor: 3.390

10.  Evaluation of Skin Hardness as a Physiological Sign of Human Thermal Status.

Authors:  Sunghyun Yoon; Jai Kyoung Sim; Noeul Park; Young-Ho Cho
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-08-13       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.