Validation of a Brief Screening Instrument for Chemical Intolerance in a Large U.S. National Sample.

BACKGROUND: Chemical intolerance (CI) is characterized by multisystem symptoms triggered by low levels of exposure to xenobiotics including chemicals, foods/food additives, and drugs/medications. Prior prevalence estimates vary from 8-33% worldwide. Clinicians and researchers need a brief, practical screening tool for identifying possible chemical intolerance. This large, population-based study describes the validation of a three-item screening questionnaire, the Brief Environmental Exposure and Sensitivity Inventory (BREESI), against the international reference standard used for assessing chemical intolerance, the Quick Environmental Exposure and Sensitivity Inventory (QEESI). METHODS: More than 10,000 people in the U.S. responded to the BREESI and the QEESI in a population-based survey. We calculated the overall prevalence of CI in this sample, as well as by gender, age, and income. Common statistical metrics were used to evaluate the BREESI as a screener for CI against the QEESI. RESULTS: The prevalence estimate for QEESI-defined chemical intolerance in the U.S. was 20.39% (95% CI 19.63-21.15%). The BREESI had 91.26% sensitivity (95% CI: 89.20-93.04%) and 92.89% specificity (95% CI: 91.77-93.90%). The positive likelihood ratio was 12.83 (95% CI: 11.07-14.88), and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.09 (95% CI: 0.08-0.12). Logistic regression demonstrates that the predicted probability of CI increased sharply with each increase in the number of BREESI items endorsed (Odds Ratio: 5.3, 95% CI: 4.90-5.75). CONCLUSIONS: Chemical intolerance may affect one in five people in the U.S. The BREESI is a new, practical instrument for researchers, clinicians, and epidemiologists. As a screening tool, the BREESI offers a high degree of confidence in case ascertainment. We recommend: screen with the BREESI, confirm with the QEESI.

Home Assessment and Remediation.

Awareness of the relationship of fungi to asthma in indoor air is very old and well documented. There is substantial evidence that mold and dampness exacerbate asthma in sensitized individuals. Many governmental and nongovernmental organizations around the world have issued guidelines to the effect that the elimination of moisture intrusion and the removal of moldy items from living space can improve respiratory health. The process of home assessment for moisture and mold presence is discussed along with factors that can be used to guide fungal exposure reduction efforts. An approach to the assessment process itself is outlined, and common causes of moisture and mold damage are described. Points that should be included in a report resulting from a home assessment and rudimentary elements of report interpretation are discussed. Emphasis is that interpretation of sampling for moisture and fungal presence should be provided by the person performing the assessment. We conclude that multifaceted remediation contributes to fungal allergen avoidance. The use of an indoor environmental professional to generate evaluation reports and remediation activities can be a valuable contribution to an overall allergen avoidance strategy.

Procedures to Assist Health Care Providers to Determine When Home Assessments for Potential Mold Exposure Are Warranted.

Drawing evidence from epidemiology and exposure assessment studies and recommendations from expert practice, we describe a process to guide health care providers helping their patients who present with symptoms that might be associated with living in damp housing. We present the procedures in the form of a guided 2-part interview. The first part has 5 questions that triage the patient toward a more detailed questionnaire that reflects features of housing conditions known to be reliably associated with exposures to mold and dampness contaminants. We chose the questions based on the conditions associated with moisture problems in homes across the United States and Canada. The goal is to facilitate the clinician's effort to help patients reduce exposure to environmental triggers that elicit symptoms to better manage their disease.

Indoor water and dampness and the health effects on children: a review.

Exposure to dampness and mold in indoor environments has received significant attention in recent research. This review focuses on studies looking at the impact of dampness, moisture and microbial agents on children's health. We then look more broadly at how research studies have tried to describe dampness and exposure to moisture. Papers published from 2010 onwards were reviewed and are briefly summarized. Most of the papers using dampness as a proxy for microbial exposure focused on respiratory tract infections, especially asthma. This review highlights new findings and also discusses the variety of approaches used to assess dampness in indoor environments.

Environmental assessment and exposure reduction of cockroaches: a practice parameter.

This parameter was developed by the Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters, representing the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI); the American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (ACAAI); and the Joint Council of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. The AAAAI and the ACAAI have jointly accepted responsibility for establishing "Environmental assessment and remediation: a practice parameter." This is a complete and comprehensive document at the current time. The medical environment is a changing environment, and not all recommendations will be appropriate for all patients. Because this document incorporated the efforts of many participants, no single person, including those who served on the Joint Task Force, is authorized to provide an official AAAAI or ACAAI interpretation of these practice parameters. Any request for information about or an interpretation of these practice parameters by the AAAAI or ACAAI should be directed to the Executive Offices of the AAAAI, the ACAAI, and the Joint Council of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. These parameters are not designed for use by pharmaceutical companies in drug promotion. The findings and conclusions in this manuscript are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).