2005
DOI: 10.1590/s0074-02762005000400003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Indoor air microbiological evaluation of offices, hospitals, industries, and shopping centers

Abstract: In this study it was compared the MAS-100 and the

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
1
7

Year Published

2009
2009
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
(24 reference statements)
0
22
1
7
Order By: Relevance
“…This observation is different from those noted by the other authors in numerous “overground” locations where seasonal fluctuations in bioaerosol concentrations are quite typical (e.g., Górny and Dutkiewicz 2002; Jones and Harrison 2004; Lis et al 1997; Nunes et al 2005; Pastuszka et al 2000; Reponen et al 1992; Wlazło et al 2008) and may confirm curative properties of these specific underground environment.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 71%
“…This observation is different from those noted by the other authors in numerous “overground” locations where seasonal fluctuations in bioaerosol concentrations are quite typical (e.g., Górny and Dutkiewicz 2002; Jones and Harrison 2004; Lis et al 1997; Nunes et al 2005; Pastuszka et al 2000; Reponen et al 1992; Wlazło et al 2008) and may confirm curative properties of these specific underground environment.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 71%
“…Operation theatre, delivery room, and intensive care unit are settings where patients are at a greater risk than the outside environment and could be polluted with bacterial pathogens released into it from various sources [6]. Environmental surface reservoirs like floors, the number of visitors, extent of indoor traffic, time of day and the number of materials brought in from outside and antibiotic resistance aggravate the extent of air bacterial microbiota [7, 8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…10 Different countries (Finland, Belgium, Brazil) have tried to define guidelines to quantify what levels of fungi are considered as inappropriate for dwellings for various kinds of patients compared to the healthy population. 13 However, in Brazil, 14,15 two texts from the Brazilian Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa) from 2000 16 based on classifying moldy surface areas (>3 m² required remediation) and listing at-risk fungi, but no threshold was defined for culture analysis at that time. 11,12 In 2017, the Belgian Ministry of Health noticed that for each of its three regions (Flanders, Wallonia, Brussels) there were different criteria to characterize dwellings at risk, but none of them had been chosen as a reference because they were considered unusable (www.health.belgium.be).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%