Sick Building Syndrome

The recent increase in occupants’ complaints of symptoms such as headache, dizzy, tired and feeling lethargy while working in a building have lead to the suspicion of Sick building Syndrome.

The building was built in 1987, received an honour award prize from the American Institute of Architects in recognition of the innovative and striking design. The building comprises of a ground floor, a mezzanine floor and ten floors each 670 square meters together with a basement car park and occupies 280 employees of five different organizations.

The survey was conceptualised from the need to respond to these complaints. This study utilised a questionnaire to examine the employee’s perception (views) on the current work environment and its effect on their personal well-being and identify factors that may be contributing towards undesired health of the occupants. The study aimed to provide an extension of knowledge of the building status and make recommendation of areas that may need improvement.

The study was carried out using the Office Environment Survey Questionnaire designed by Raw etal (1995) at the Building Research Establishment in the United Kingdom. The study was carried out in two phases a pilot and main study. It included all occupants (230) of the building (excluding 50 occupants who were the sample for the pilot study) in order to get a broader perspective of the incidence of Sick Building Syndrome symptoms. The response rate was 36.1% and data analysis was carried out using SPSS analysis software.

In conclusion the criteria for SBS were fulfilled according to the diagnostic principles suggested by the WHO study group. A significant proportion of the building occupants appear to be affected but more likely consequences are reduced work performance and increased absenteeism.

Complaints or concerns about unsatisfactory indoor environment should be treated seriously and further investigation on larger sample is needed to analyse the simultaneous measurement of thermal comfort and air quality, as well as surveying the normal activities of occupants and determine the significant of complaints and areas of improvement.

In spite of its name, Sick Building Syndrome is a complaint suffered by people, not building, and can only be diagnosed by assessing the health of the occupants, not examining the building itself(Raw 1995).

History of Sick Building Syndrome

Sick Building Syndrome (SBS) was first widely recognized in the mid-1970s, around the time of the energy crisis and the resulting trend toward energy conservation Heating, cooling and moving of air in building accounts for a significant portion of their energy consumption, therefore sealing building to make them energy-efficient has become the norm, leaving occupants dependent on mechanical systems rather than open windows for outside air and ventilation (London Hazard Centre 1990).

A building is said to manifest SBS when a substantial proportion of building occupants complain of symptoms producing discomfort (HSE 2000). The number of different people and professionals involved in the design and construction of an average building provides much scope for poor decision-making leading ultimately to unhealthy working condition (Vischer 1989). In some European countries – Sweden, Germany and Holland – workers have a statutory right to be involved with employers’ plans for changes in the workplace (Raw 1992). In these countries the Building regulation stipulate, for example, that everyone has the right to a window, that no-one should work in deep space, and that thermal environmental matters: ‘before the northern European architect draws a single line, the users are already crowding around the drawing board’ (Duffy 1988)

What is Sick Building Syndrome?

Occasionally almost everyone feels unwell because they are suffering from one or more common symptom of discomfort such as headache, dry throat or sore eyes. However, for no obvious reasons, people working in particular buildings experience these sorts of symptoms more often than is usual. Thos is often described as Sick Building Syndromes (HSE2000). The syndrome is now considered to be wide spread phenomenon particularly in new and remodeled buildings where an estimated 30to 50% of such building may be affected (WHO 1982). In these buildings, which have a problem, up to 80% of the occupants may present with such symptoms as described above (Hawkins 1996).

SBS is now recognised by the world health Organisation and the UK Health and Safety Executive as an occupational health problem for which assessment has to be made and control measures implemented just like any other occupational health risk (Hawkins 1996).

The term SBS is commonly used to describe a complex of symptoms which appear to be highly prevalent in some buildings and which have a definitive works relationship. Several other terms that have been used include:

Tight Building syndrome

Sick Office Syndrome

Office Eye Syndrome (Raw 1992, Hawkins 1996)

Sick Building Syndrome is now the accepted terminology having been recogonised by the World Health Organisation (WHO 1986). A literature review carried out by the author shows that there is no agreed working definition of SBS. Work by Hawkins (1996) suggests that it is important to have some understanding of when term would be appropriate and when other more appropriate term should be used. Raw (1992) also states that in spite of the variety of terms used there is a clear consistency in the syndrome being described  , however there appears to be a degree of variability in the definitions offered. A European Communities Report described SBS as “a set of varied symptoms experienced predominantly by people working in air conditioned buildings……” (Molina ct al 1989). This follows quite closely form WORLD Health Organisation statements (WHO 1986).

Moline et al (1986) insinuate that SBS can be diagnosed only after eliminating all other building related illnesses. Raw (1992) argues that this school of thought is unhelpful as it is better to maintain a distinction between SBS and complaints about discomfort and several other factors. Raw (1992) advocates that SBS should be defined by a set of symptoms, not by the overall incidence of diseases or by perceived discomfort without symptoms. For the purpose of this study SBS thus defined in terms of a group of symptoms which people experience while they are in specific building