Skip to main content

Building Related Illness (BRI)/ Sick Building Syndrome (SBS)

BayBiotech.NET
Built environments both residential and non residential are subject to number of indoor air quality (IAQ) and Indoor environment (IE) problems that may cause acute symptoms, health risks or discomfort.
A frequent IAQ and IE investigations can determine the occurrence of BRI and provide with healthier work environment. This is of utmost importance for Pharmaceutical/ Life Sciences industry where the product is directly subject to the human usage.
Non residential buildings are more prone to BRI as there is a high volume of occupants coming from diverse geographical areas interact in an environment where the ventilation of the building is not directly under the occupants control.
Health hazard evaluation teams from the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) conducts the investigation upon request and provides with strategies to avoid the recurrence of the problem. Some of the risk factors that may be used to evaluate biological contaminants as potential causes of allergy/asthma/sinusitis are as follows:
1. Mold: active mold infestation on building material, building history of water damage, wet building site, musty odors, viable mold test results of >1000 CFU/m3 and total mold counts >10,000 S/m3.
2. Dust mites: damp interiors, > 2 ug/g mite allergen levels in floor dust samples.
3. Apart from dust mites and mold, bacterias are major contributors to indoor health hazards and some of the diseases caused due to them are Tuberculosis, Pneumonia, Diphtheria, Anthrax, Meningitis, Respiratory infections and wound infections.

Poor IAQ contributed by various identifiable factors may cause decreased work performance and may impose significant economic costs on employers. Thus, it is important to have a regular investigations planned to test the health of the buildings used for performing the work.

In the US, NIOSH has developed a protocol to serve the needs of its health hazard evaluation teams. Such a team consists of an industrial hygienist, an epidemiologist, and a technical person familiar with the operation and maintenance of building mechanical systems.

To find out more on the topic, you may want to follow the readings as under:

1. www.epa.gov
2. USEPA/ NIOSH, EPA/400/1-91/003, DHHS Publication No. 91-1141-1991.
3. Thad Godish, Indoor Environmental Quality, CRC Press LLC, 2001.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Amendments for High Risk Device Type Regulatory Pathway

BayBiotech.NET Government Accounting Office (“GAO”) has issued a long-awaited report evaluating the use of the 510(k) process by the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA” or the “Agency”) in the January of 2009. Report mainly focused on Preamendment class III devices. Although most high-risk class III medical devices are subject to the demanding premarket approval (“PMA”) process, preamendment class III devices may be cleared through the 510(k) pathway until FDA issues regulations requiring a PMA. Under the Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990, FDA was required either to reclassify preamendment class III devices into class I or II, or (2) issue regulations requiring PMA approval for the devices, GAO noted that 20 preamendment class III device types have not yet been addressed by the Agency. GAO has urged FDA to take required steps to address the remaining class III devices that continue to be eligible for 510(k) review. As a result of the report, FDA has committed to address al...
Post a Comment
Read more

What to include in Traditional 510(k) Filing for Medical Devices

BayBiotech.NET A 510k is a premarket submission made to FDA to demonstrate that a medical device to be marketed is at least as safe and effective, that is, substantially equivalent, to a legally marketed device. A Traditional 510(k) submission must include the required elements as per 21 CFR 807.87 (Information required in a premarket notification submission):  the name of device, (the trade or proprietary name), if any, and the common or usual name or classification name of the device.  description of the device, include device specifications and reference applicable guidance documents, special controls, or standards; photographs or engineering drawings should be supplied, if applicable.  comparison with a predicate device(s), indicating similarities and/or differences accompanied by data, as appropriate; this information may include an identification of materials, design considerations, energy expected to be used or delivered by the device, and a description of the operatio...
Post a Comment
Read more

Harmonization by Doing (HBD): Japan & U.S. Collaboration

BayBiotech.NET HBD is an international cooperative effort by Japan and US for regulatory convergence for Medical Devices. The efforts are focused on to develop global clinical trials and address regulatory barriers for timely device approvals. To address the needs for additional evaluation, the HBD initiative is a pilot project launched jointly by FDA and MHLW-PMDA for the premarket review of device cardiovascular technology. Instead of taking a theoretical approach to harmonization, HBD is focused on Proof of concept by utilizing parallel development, application submissions and review of actual medical device projects. HBD Study intends to collect and analyze regulatory submission data from multiple applications in the U.S. and Japan. The purpose of the study is to further understand differences that may exist with format and content, to define best practices and to improve globally harmonized processes. To read more about the HBD program, follow the link: http://www.fda.gov/M...
Post a Comment
Read more