Dataset Information

Wellbuilt for wellbeing: Controlling relative humidity in the workplace matters for our health.

ABSTRACT: This study offers a new perspective on the role of relative humidity in strategies to improve the health and wellbeing of office workers. A lack of studies of sufficient participant size and diversity relating relative humidity (RH) to measured health outcomes has been a driving factor in relaxing thermal comfort standards for RH and removing a lower limit for dry air. We examined the association between RH and objectively measured stress responses, physical activity (PA), and sleep quality. A diverse group of office workers (n = 134) from four well-functioning federal buildings wore chest-mounted heart rate variability monitors for three consecutive days, while at the same time, RH and temperature (T) were measured in their workplaces. Those who spent the majority of their time at the office in conditions of 30%-60% RH experienced 25% less stress at the office than those who spent the majority of their time in drier conditions. Further, a correlational study of our stress response suggests optimal values for RH may exist within an even narrower range around 45%. Finally, we found an indirect effect of objectively measured poorer sleep quality, mediated by stress responses, for those outside this range.

SUBMITTER: Razjouyan J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6973066 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Wellbuilt for wellbeing: Controlling relative humidity in the workplace matters for our health.

Razjouyan Javad J Lee Hyoki H Gilligan Brian B Lindberg Casey C Nguyen Hung H Canada Kelli K Burton Alex A Sharafkhaneh Amir A Srinivasan Karthik K Currim Faiz F Ram Sudha S Mehl Matthias R MR Goebel Nicole N Lunden Melisa M Bhangar Seema S Heerwagen Judith J Kampschroer Kevin K Sternberg Esther M EM Najafi Bijan B

Indoor air 20191125 1

This study offers a new perspective on the role of relative humidity in strategies to improve the health and wellbeing of office workers. A lack of studies of sufficient participant size and diversity relating relative humidity (RH) to measured health outcomes has been a driving factor in relaxing thermal comfort standards for RH and removing a lower limit for dry air. We examined the association between RH and objectively measured stress responses, physical activity (PA), and sleep quality. A d ...[more]

PMID: 31663168

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEvaluations of the impact of interventions for resource allocation purposes commonly focus on health status. There is, however, also concern about broader impacts on wellbeing and, increasingly, on a person's capability. This study aims to compare the impact on health status and capability of seven major health conditions, and highlight differences in treatment priorities when outcomes are measured by capability as opposed to health status.MethodsThe study was a cross-sectional four country survey (n = 6650) of eight population groups: seven disease groups with: arthritis, asthma, cancer, depression, diabetes, hearing loss, and heart disease and one health population 'comparator' group. Two simple self-complete questionnaires were used to measure health status (EQ-5D-5L) and capability (ICECAP-A). Individuals were classified by illness severity using condition-specific questionnaires. Effect sizes were used to estimate: (i) the difference in health status and capability for those with conditions, relative to a healthy population; and (ii) the impact of the severity of the condition on health status and capability within each disease group.Findings5248 individuals were included in the analysis. Individuals with depression have the greatest mean reduction in both health (effect size, 1.26) and capability (1.22) compared to the healthy population. The effect sizes for capability for depression are much greater than for all other conditions, which is not the case for health. For example, the arthritis group effect size for health (1.24) is also high and similar to that of depression, whereas for the same arthritis group, the effect size for capability is much lower than that for depression (0.55). In terms of severity within disease groups, individuals categorised as 'mild' have similar capability levels to the healthy population (effect sizes <0.2, excluding depression) but lower health status than the healthy population (≥0.4).ConclusionSignificant differences exist in the relative effect sizes across diseases when measured by health status and capability. In terms of treating morbidity, a shift in focus from health gain to capability gain would increase funding priorities for patients with depression specifically and severe illnesses more generally.

Dataset Information

Wellbuilt for wellbeing: Controlling relative humidity in the workplace matters for our health.

Publications

Wellbuilt for wellbeing: Controlling relative humidity in the workplace matters for our health.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets