Assessment of US Air Force student pilots with intermittent monofixation syndrome on a non-stereoptic dependent flight maneuver in pilot training

The United States Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine (USAFSAM) and Aeromedical Consult Service (ACS) have developed waiver criteria for pilots with subtle substandard depth perception. This is to allow United States Air Force (USAF) pilots with mild depth perception deficiency to continue flying duties while limiting the risk to flight safety and ensuring the availability of costly human resources. From 1999 to 2005, 166 aviators were given waivers for intermittent monofixation syndrome (IMFS). Of these, 96 were student pilots who performed slightly worse at stereoptic dependent flight maneuvers than student pilots (8,907) with normal depth perception (Lowry, 2006).^ This study's purpose is to evaluate the performance of the extended-trail maneuver, a non-stereoptic dependent flying maneuver, as executed by a cohort of 12 United States Air Force student pilots with intermittent monofixation syndrome versus the cohort of 100 student pilots with normal depth perception. These subjects are extracted from the cohorts examined by Lowry (2006) and the null hypothesis predicts no statistical difference in the performance of the non-stereoptic dependant flight maneuver extended-trail between student pilots with intermittent monofixation syndrome and those without the condition. ^

Pilot study assessment of indoor air quality in two dental settings: Particulate matter and volatile organic compounds

Objective: To assess the indoor environment of two different types of dental practices regarding VOCs, PM2.5, and ultrafine particulate concentrations and examine the relationship between specific dental activities and contaminant levels. Method: The indoor environments of two selected dental settings (private practice and community health center) will were assessed in regards to VOCs, PM 2.5, and ultrafine particulate concentrations, as well as other indoor air quality parameters (CO2, CO, temperature, and relative humidity). The sampling duration was four working days for each dental practice. Continuous monitoring and integrated sampling methods were used and number of occupants, frequency, type, and duration of dental procedures or activities recorded. Measurements were compared to indoor air quality standards and guidelines. Results: The private practice had higher CO2, CO, and most VOC concentrations than the community health center, but the community health center had higher PM2.5 and ultrafine PM concentrations. Concentrations of p-dichlorobenzene and PM2.5 exceeded some guidelines. Outdoor concentrations greatly influenced the indoor concentration. There were no significant differences in contaminant levels between the operatory and general area. Indoor concentrations during the working period were not always consistently higher than during the nonworking period. Peaks in particulate matter concentration occurred during root canal and composite procedures.^

A feasibility study for assessing building occupants' indoor air quality expectations compared to nationally recognized standards

Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) can have significant implications for health, productivity, job performance, and operating cost. Professional experience in the field of indoor air quality suggests that high expectations (better than nationally established standards) (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)) of workplace indoor air quality lead to increase air quality complaints. To determine whether there is a positive association between expectations and indoor air quality complaints, a one-time descriptive and analytical cross-sectional pilot study was conducted. Area Safety Liaisons (n = 330) at University of Texas Health Science Center – Houston were asked to answer a questionnaire regarding their expectations of four workplace indoor air quality indicators i.e., (temperature, relative humidity, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide) and if they experienced and reported indoor air quality problems. A chi-square test for independence was used to evaluate associations among the variables of interest. The response rate was 54% (n = 177). Results did not show significant associations between expectation and indoor air quality. However, a greater proportion of Area Safety Liaisons who expected indoor air quality indicators to be better than the established standard experienced greater indoor air quality problems. Similarly, a slightly higher proportion of Area Liaisons who expected indoor air quality indicators to be better than the standard reported greater indoor air quality complaints. ^ The findings indicated that a greater proportion of Area Safety Liaisons with high expectations (conditions that are beyond what is considered normal and acceptable by ASHRAE) experienced greater indoor air quality discomfort. This result suggests a positive association between high expectations and experienced and reported indoor air quality complaints. Future studies may be able to address whether the frequency of complaints and resulting investigations can be reduced through information and education about what are acceptable conditions.^