挪威办公室员工自我报告的共享与私人办公室室内气候及其对头痛和呼吸道症状的影响

Therese Nitter Moazami , Tom Sterud
{"title":"挪威办公室员工自我报告的共享与私人办公室室内气候及其对头痛和呼吸道症状的影响","authors":"Therese Nitter Moazami ,&nbsp;Tom Sterud","doi":"10.1016/j.indenv.2025.100118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This two-wave cross-sectional study analyzed data from 7968 Norwegian office workers collected in 2016 and 2019 to investigate associations among self-reported indoor climate, headaches, and respiratory symptoms across six office types. Interaction effects between office type, indoor climate, and health outcomes were assessed, alongside a mediation analysis examining indoor climate as a mediator between office type and health outcomes. Adjusted generalized linear models (GLMs) revealed that shared offices had significantly poorer indoor climate conditions than private offices, with the highest odds reported in flexible spaces (OR = 1.72, 95 % CI: 1.41–2.09) and offices with over 24 occupants (OR = 1.57, 95 % CI: 1.27–1.93). Self-reported poor indoor climate was associated with respiratory symptoms (OR = 2.17, 95 % CI: 1.74–2.27) and headaches (OR = 1.66, 95 % CI: 1.48 – 1.86). No direct association was found between office type and health outcomes; however, mediation analysis demonstrated a significant indirect effect of office type on health outcomes via indoor climate. Interaction analysis further revealed that the association between poor indoor climate and respiratory symptoms was stronger in shared offices compared to cell offices for both respiratory symptoms (OR = 2.32 vs. OR = 1.80) and headaches (OR = 1.69 vs. OR = 1.44). In conclusion, this study demonstrates notable associations between office type, perceived indoor climate, and self-reported health outcomes. While the cross-sectional design limits the ability to determine the direction or underlying mechanisms of these associations, the results emphasize the relevance of both office layout and indoor climate quality in evaluating workplace health.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100665,"journal":{"name":"Indoor Environments","volume":"2 3","pages":"Article 100118"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Self-reported indoor climate in shared vs. private offices and its effects on headache and respiratory symptoms in Norwegian office workers\",\"authors\":\"Therese Nitter Moazami ,&nbsp;Tom Sterud\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.indenv.2025.100118\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This two-wave cross-sectional study analyzed data from 7968 Norwegian office workers collected in 2016 and 2019 to investigate associations among self-reported indoor climate, headaches, and respiratory symptoms across six office types. Interaction effects between office type, indoor climate, and health outcomes were assessed, alongside a mediation analysis examining indoor climate as a mediator between office type and health outcomes. Adjusted generalized linear models (GLMs) revealed that shared offices had significantly poorer indoor climate conditions than private offices, with the highest odds reported in flexible spaces (OR = 1.72, 95 % CI: 1.41–2.09) and offices with over 24 occupants (OR = 1.57, 95 % CI: 1.27–1.93). Self-reported poor indoor climate was associated with respiratory symptoms (OR = 2.17, 95 % CI: 1.74–2.27) and headaches (OR = 1.66, 95 % CI: 1.48 – 1.86). No direct association was found between office type and health outcomes; however, mediation analysis demonstrated a significant indirect effect of office type on health outcomes via indoor climate. Interaction analysis further revealed that the association between poor indoor climate and respiratory symptoms was stronger in shared offices compared to cell offices for both respiratory symptoms (OR = 2.32 vs. OR = 1.80) and headaches (OR = 1.69 vs. OR = 1.44). In conclusion, this study demonstrates notable associations between office type, perceived indoor climate, and self-reported health outcomes. While the cross-sectional design limits the ability to determine the direction or underlying mechanisms of these associations, the results emphasize the relevance of both office layout and indoor climate quality in evaluating workplace health.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100665,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indoor Environments\",\"volume\":\"2 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 100118\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indoor Environments\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950362025000475\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indoor Environments","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950362025000475","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这项双波横断面研究分析了2016年和2019年收集的7968名挪威上班族的数据,以调查六种办公室类型中自我报告的室内气候、头痛和呼吸道症状之间的关系。评估了办公室类型、室内气候和健康结果之间的相互作用,并进行了中介分析,检验了室内气候作为办公室类型和健康结果之间的中介。调整后的广义线性模型(GLMs)显示,共享办公室的室内气候条件明显比私人办公室差,在灵活空间(OR = 1.72, 95 % CI: 1.41-2.09)和24人以上的办公室(OR = 1.57, 95 % CI: 1.27-1.93)的几率最高。自我报告的室内恶劣气候与呼吸道症状(OR = 2.17, 95 % CI: 1.74-2.27)和头痛(OR = 1.66, 95 % CI: 1.48 - 1.86)相关。办公室类型与健康结果之间没有直接关联;然而,中介分析表明,办公室类型通过室内气候对健康结果有显著的间接影响。相互作用分析进一步显示,在共享办公室中,较差的室内气候与呼吸道症状之间的关联在呼吸道症状(OR = 2.32 vs. OR = 1.80)和头痛(OR = 1.69 vs. OR = 1.44)方面都强于单间办公室。总之,本研究证明了办公室类型、感知到的室内气候和自我报告的健康结果之间的显著关联。虽然横断面设计限制了确定这些关联的方向或潜在机制的能力,但研究结果强调了办公室布局和室内气候质量在评估工作场所健康方面的相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Self-reported indoor climate in shared vs. private offices and its effects on headache and respiratory symptoms in Norwegian office workers
This two-wave cross-sectional study analyzed data from 7968 Norwegian office workers collected in 2016 and 2019 to investigate associations among self-reported indoor climate, headaches, and respiratory symptoms across six office types. Interaction effects between office type, indoor climate, and health outcomes were assessed, alongside a mediation analysis examining indoor climate as a mediator between office type and health outcomes. Adjusted generalized linear models (GLMs) revealed that shared offices had significantly poorer indoor climate conditions than private offices, with the highest odds reported in flexible spaces (OR = 1.72, 95 % CI: 1.41–2.09) and offices with over 24 occupants (OR = 1.57, 95 % CI: 1.27–1.93). Self-reported poor indoor climate was associated with respiratory symptoms (OR = 2.17, 95 % CI: 1.74–2.27) and headaches (OR = 1.66, 95 % CI: 1.48 – 1.86). No direct association was found between office type and health outcomes; however, mediation analysis demonstrated a significant indirect effect of office type on health outcomes via indoor climate. Interaction analysis further revealed that the association between poor indoor climate and respiratory symptoms was stronger in shared offices compared to cell offices for both respiratory symptoms (OR = 2.32 vs. OR = 1.80) and headaches (OR = 1.69 vs. OR = 1.44). In conclusion, this study demonstrates notable associations between office type, perceived indoor climate, and self-reported health outcomes. While the cross-sectional design limits the ability to determine the direction or underlying mechanisms of these associations, the results emphasize the relevance of both office layout and indoor climate quality in evaluating workplace health.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信