Clustering of office workers from the OFFICAIR study in The Netherlands based on their self-reported health and comfort

Journal Article (2020)
Author(s)

Dong Hyun Kim (TU Delft - Indoor Environment)

PM Bluyssen (TU Delft - Indoor Environment)

Research Group
Indoor Environment
Copyright
© 2020 D.H. Kim, P.M. Bluyssen
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.106860
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2020
Language
English
Copyright
© 2020 D.H. Kim, P.M. Bluyssen
Research Group
Indoor Environment
Volume number
176
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

The growing field of indoor health and comfort studies recently shifted from predicting the average comfort and wellbeing of a large population into identifying the needs of individuals in different scenarios. This study aimed to identify different profiles of office workers in the Netherlands who took part in the OFFICAIR study, based on their self-reported health and comfort. Associations of respondents’ health and comfort with gender and type of office indicated that female occupants experienced significantly higher numbers of building-related symptoms and consistently lower satisfaction levels of their office environment than male occupants. Workers in open space offices without partitions reported lower satisfaction and suffered from building-related symptoms more frequently than occupants in single person offices. TwoStep cluster analysis revealed three profiles of occupants: Healthy and satisfied workers, Moderate healthy and noise-bothered workers and Unhealthy and Air and temperature-bothered workers. While the first group was by far the healthiest, significant higher risks for building-related symptoms such as dry eyes (OR: 3.38), dry skin (OR: 2.87) and watering, itchy eyes (OR: 2.7) were identified for the unhealthy group than for the moderate healthy group. The results confirm the need of an integrated approach to better understand moderate and unhealthy groups in order to provide customised solutions for individuals with different complaints and needs.