AN INVESTIGATION OF VOLATILE ORGANIC AIR CONTAMINANTS IN THE INDOOR MANUFACTURED HOUSING ENVIRONMENT (TEXAS)

Manufactured housing has been found to have substantial levels of formaldehyde in the indoor air. Because mobile homes are more affordable than conventional housing, there has been a large increase in their use in the U.S. This increase in mobile home use has been substantial in the sunbelt regions such as Texas, where high temperatures and humidities may enhance out-gassing of formaldehyde and other volatile organic compounds from construction and furnishing materials and increase any potential health hazards.^ The influences of environmental, architectural and temporal factors on the presence of indoor formaldehyde and other organic compounds were investigated in conjunction with the Texas Indoor Air Quality Study of manufactured housing. A matched pair of mobile homes, one with electric heating and cooking utilities and the other with propane gas utilities, were used for a series of controlled experiments over a fourteen month period from October, 1982 through November, 1983.^ Over this fourteen month period formaldehyde levels decreased approximately 33%. Daily fluctuations of 20% to 40% were observed even with a constant indoor temperature. An increase in indoor temperature of 8(DEGREES)C doubled the measured formaldehyde concentration. Opening windows resulted in decreases of indoor formaldehyde levels of up to 50%. Studies of the impact of propane as a cooking source showed no increase in formaldehyde levels with stove use.^ The presence and concentration of selected volatile organic compounds is influenced greatest by occupancy. Occupants continually open and close windows and doors, vary the operation and settings (temperature) of air control systems, and vary in their selection of furnishings and use of consumer products, which may act as sources of indoor air contaminants. ^

A comparative analysis of hospital -based physician monitoring systems

The purpose of the multiple case-study was to determine how hospital subsystems (such as physician monitoring and credentialing; quality assurance; risk management; and peer review) were supporting the monitoring of physicians? Three large metropolitan hospitals in Texas were studied and designated as hospitals #1, #2, and #3. Realizing that hospital subsystems are a unique entity and part of a larger system, conclusions were made on the premises of a quality control system, in relation to the tools of government (particularly the Health Care Quality Improvement Act (HCQIA)), and in relation to itself as a tool of a hospital.^ Three major analytical assessments were performed. First, the subsystems were analyzed as to their "completeness"; secondly, the subsystems were analyzed for "performance"; and thirdly, the subsystems were analyzed in reference to the interaction of completeness and performance.^ The physician credentialing and monitoring and the peer review subsystems as quality control systems were most complete, efficient, and effective in hospitals #1 and #3. The HCQIA did not seem to be an influencing factor in the completeness of the subsystem in hospital #1. The quality assurance and risk management subsystem in hospital #2 was not representative of completeness and performance and the HCQIA was not an influencing factor in the completeness of the Q.A. or R.M. systems in any hospital. The efficiency (computerization) of the physician credentialing, quality assurance and peer review subsystems in hospitals #1 and #3 seemed to contribute to their effectiveness (system-wide effect).^ The results indicated that the more complete, effective, and efficient subsystems were characterized by (1) all defined activities being met, (2) the HCQIA being an influencing factor, (3) a decentralized administrative structure, (4) computerization an important element, and (5) staff was sophisticated in subsystem operations. However, other variables were identified which deserve further research as to their effect on completeness and performance of subsystems. They include (1) medical staff affiliations, (2) system funding levels, (3) the system's administrative structure, and (4) the physician staff "cultural" characteristics. Perhaps by understanding other influencing factors, health care administrators may plan subsystems that will be compatible with legislative requirements and administrative objectives. ^