Literature DB >> 22299641

Comparison of sampling methods for the assessment of indoor microbial exposure.

M Frankel1, M Timm, E W Hansen, A M Madsen.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Indoor microbial exposure has been related to allergy and respiratory disorders. However, the lack of standardized sampling methodology is problematic when investigating dose-response relationships between exposure and health effects. In this study, different sampling methods were compared regarding their assessment of microbial exposures, including culturable fungi and bacteria, endotoxin, as well as the total inflammatory potential (TIP) of dust samples from Danish homes. The Gesamtstaubprobenahme (GSP) filter sampler and BioSampler were used for sampling of airborne dust, whereas the dust fall collector (DFC), the electrostatic dust fall collector (EDC), and vacuum cleaner were used for sampling of settled dust. The GSP assessed significantly higher microbial levels than the BioSampler, yet measurements from both samplers correlated significantly. Considerably higher levels of fungi, endotoxin, and TIP were found in the EDC compared with the DFC, and regarding fungi, the EDC correlated more strongly and significantly with vacuumed dust than the DFC. Fungi in EDC and vacuum dust correlated most strongly with airborne dust, and in particular, the measurements from the EDC associated well with those from GSP. Settled dust from the EDC was most representative of airborne dust and may thus be considered as a surrogate for the assessment of indoor airborne microbial exposure. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Significant discrepancies between sampling methods regarding indoor microbial exposures have been revealed. This study thus facilitates comparison between methods and may therefore be used as a frame of reference when studying the literature or when conducting further studies on indoor microbial exposure. Results also imply that the relatively simple EDC method for the collection of settled dust may be used as an alternative to otherwise tedious and time-consuming airborne dust sampling.
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22299641     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0668.2012.00770.x

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


  22 in total

1.  Seasonal variations of indoor microbial exposures and their relation to temperature, relative humidity, and air exchange rate.

Authors:  Mika Frankel; Gabriel Bekö; Michael Timm; Sine Gustavsen; Erik Wind Hansen; Anne Mette Madsen
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2012-09-21       Impact factor: 4.792

2.  Effect of deployment time on endotoxin and allergen exposure assessment using electrostatic dust collectors.

Authors:  Brita Kilburg-Basnyat; Nervana Metwali; Peter S Thorne
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2014-09-03

3.  Field sampling of indoor bioaerosols.

Authors:  Jennie Cox; Hamza Mbareche; William G Lindsley; Caroline Duchaine
Journal:  Aerosol Sci Technol       Date:  2019-11-21       Impact factor: 2.908

Review 4.  Pediatric Asthma and the Indoor Microbial Environment.

Authors:  Lidia Casas; Christina Tischer; Martin Täubel
Journal:  Curr Environ Health Rep       Date:  2016-09

5.  Quantitative assessment of microbes from samples of indoor air and dust.

Authors:  Hanna K Leppänen; Martin Täubel; Balamuralikrishna Jayaprakash; Asko Vepsäläinen; Pertti Pasanen; Anne Hyvärinen
Journal:  J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol       Date:  2017-10-04       Impact factor: 5.563

6.  Bioaerosol Sampling: Classical Approaches, Advances, and Perspectives.

Authors:  Gediminas Mainelis
Journal:  Aerosol Sci Technol       Date:  2019-10-04       Impact factor: 4.809

7.  Evaluation of sampling methods for toxicological testing of indoor air particulate matter.

Authors:  Jenni Tirkkonen; Martin Täubel; Maija-Riitta Hirvonen; Hanna Leppänen; William G Lindsley; Bean T Chen; Anne Hyvärinen; Kati Huttunen
Journal:  Inhal Toxicol       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.724

8.  Comparison of indoor air sampling and dust collection methods for fungal exposure assessment using quantitative PCR.

Authors:  Jennie Cox; Reshmi Indugula; Stephen Vesper; Zheng Zhu; Roman Jandarov; Tiina Reponen
Journal:  Environ Sci Process Impacts       Date:  2017-10-18       Impact factor: 4.238

9.  Performance of electrostatic dust collectors (EDCs) for endotoxin assessment in homes: Effect of mailing, placement, heating, and electrostatic charge.

Authors:  Brita Kilburg-Basnyat; Nervana Metwali; Peter S Thorne
Journal:  J Occup Environ Hyg       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 2.155

10.  Coarse particulate matter and airborne endotoxin within wood stove homes.

Authors:  M McNamara; J Thornburg; E Semmens; T Ward; C Noonan
Journal:  Indoor Air       Date:  2013-04-18       Impact factor: 5.770

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.