Torie Grant1, Ana M Rule2, Kirsten Koehler2, Robert A Wood1, Elizabeth C Matsui3. 1. Division of Pediatric Allergy/Immunology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 2. Department of Environmental Health and Engineering, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. 3. Departments of Population Health and Pediatrics, Dell Medical School, The University of Texas at Austin, 1701 Trinity St., Stop Z0500, Austin, TX, 78712, USA. elizabeth.matsui@austin.utexas.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review current indoor allergen sampling devices, including devices to measure allergen in reservoir and airborne dust, and personal sampling devices, with attention to sampling rationale and major indoor allergen size and characteristics. RECENT FINDINGS: While reservoir dust vacuuming samples and airborne dust volumetric air sampling remain popular techniques, recent literature describes sampling using furnace filters and ion-charging devices, both which help to eliminate the need for trained staff; however, variable correlation with reservoir dust and volumetric air sampling has been described. Personal sampling devices include intra-nasal samples and personal volumetric air samples. While these devices may offer better estimates of breathable allergens, they are worn for short periods of time and can be cumbersome. Reservoir dust sampling is inexpensive and is possible for families to perform. Airborne dust sampling can be more expensive and may better quantify cat, dog, and mouse allergen exposure. Personal sampling devices may offer a better representation of breathable air.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review current indoor allergen sampling devices, including devices to measure allergen in reservoir and airborne dust, and personal sampling devices, with attention to sampling rationale and major indoor allergen size and characteristics. RECENT FINDINGS: While reservoir dust vacuuming samples and airborne dust volumetric air sampling remain popular techniques, recent literature describes sampling using furnace filters and ion-charging devices, both which help to eliminate the need for trained staff; however, variable correlation with reservoir dust and volumetric air sampling has been described. Personal sampling devices include intra-nasal samples and personal volumetric air samples. While these devices may offer better estimates of breathable allergens, they are worn for short periods of time and can be cumbersome. Reservoir dust sampling is inexpensive and is possible for families to perform. Airborne dust sampling can be more expensive and may better quantify cat, dog, and mouse allergen exposure. Personal sampling devices may offer a better representation of breathable air.
Entities:
Keywords:
Airborne allergen sampling; Allergen in settled dust; Indoor allergen exposure; Indoor allergen sampling; Personal allergen samplers; Vacuum allergen sampling
Authors: Stuart L Abramson; Anne Turner-Henson; Lise Anderson; Mary P Hemstreet; L Kay Bartholomew; Christine L M Joseph; Shenghui Tang; Shellie Tyrrell; Noreen M Clark; Dennis Ownby Journal: J Sch Health Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 2.118
Authors: Megan M Tschudy; Joshua Sharfstein; Elizabeth Matsui; Charles S Barnes; Stacey Chacker; Rosa Codina; John R Cohn; Megan Sandel; H James Wedner Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2017-02-10 Impact factor: 10.793
Authors: Torie Grant; Charles Aloe; Matthew Perzanowski; Wanda Phipatanakul; Mary E Bollinger; Rachel Miller; Elizabeth C Matsui Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract Date: 2016-12-05
Authors: A Villaseñor; D Rosace; D Obeso; M Pérez-Gordo; T Chivato; C Barbas; D Barber; M M Escribese Journal: Clin Exp Allergy Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 5.018
Authors: A Custovic; R Green; A Fletcher; A Smith; C A Pickering; M D Chapman; A Woodcock Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 1997-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Samuel J Arbes; Michelle Sever; Ben Vaughn; Jigna Mehta; Jeffrey T Lynch; Herman Mitchell; Jane A Hoppin; Harvey L Spencer; Dale P Sandler; Darryl C Zeldin Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Ingrid Sander; Anne Lotz; Verena Liebers; Eva Zahradnik; Ulrich Sauke-Gensow; Jens Petersen; Monika Raulf Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2021-11-05 Impact factor: 3.015