Indoor environmental conditions (thermal, noise, light, and indoor air quality) may affect
workers’ comfort, and consequently their health and well-being, as well as their productivity.
This study aimed to assess the relations between perceived indoor environment and occupants’
comfort, and to examine the modifying effects of both personal and building characteristics.
Within the framework of the European project OFFICAIR, a questionnaire survey was administered to
7441 workers in 167 “modern” office buildings in eight European countries (Finland, France, Greece,
Hungary, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain). Occupants assessed indoor environmental
quality (IEQ) using both crude IEQ items (satisfaction with thermal comfort, noise, light, and indoor
air quality), and detailed items related to indoor environmental parameters (e.g., too hot/cold
temperature, humid/dry air, noise inside/outside, natural/artificial light, odor) of their office
environment. Ordinal logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the relations between
perceived IEQ and occupants’ comfort. The highest association with occupants’ overall comfort was
found for “noise”, followed by “air quality”, “light” and “thermal” satisfaction. Analysis of detailed
parameters revealed that “noise inside the buildings” was highly associated with occupants’ overall
comfort. “Layout of the offices” was the next parameter highly associated with overall comfort.
The relations between IEQ and comfort differed by personal characteristics (gender, age, and the
Effort Reward Imbalance index), and building characteristics (office type and building’s location).
Workplace design should take into account both occupant and the building characteristics in order to
provide healthier and more comfortable conditions to their occupants.

Source contribution to atmospheric particulate matter (PM) has been exhaustively modelled. However, people spend most of their time indoors where this approach is less explored. This evidence worsens considering elders living in Elderly Care Centres, since they are more susceptible. The present study aims to investigate the PM composition and sources influencing elderly exposure. Two 2-week sampling campaigns were conducted—one during early fall (warm phase) and another throughout the winter (cold phase). PM10 were collected with two TCR-Tecora^® samplers that were located in an Elderly Care Centre living room and in the correspondent outdoor. Chemical analysis of the particles was performed by neutron activation analysis for element characterization, by ion chromatography for the determination of water soluble ions and by a thermal optical technique for the measurement of organic and elemental carbon. Statistical analysis showed that there were no statistical differences between seasons and environments. The sum of the indoor PM10 components measured in this work explained 57 and 53 % of the total PM10 mass measured by gravimetry in warm and cold campaigns, respectively. Outdoor PM10 concentrations were significantly higher during the day than night (p value < 0.05), as well as Ca²⁺, Fe, Sb and Zn. The contribution of indoor and outdoor sources was assessed by principal component analysis and showed the importance of the highways and the airport located less than 500 m from the Elderly Care Centre for both indoor and outdoor air quality.