Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Performance of dust allergen carpet samplers in controlled laboratory studies

Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology volume 23, pages 385–391 (2013)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Allergens and other pollutants in house dust are collected using a variety of dust samplers that are assumed to operate similarly. This factorial design study compared sampler performance under controlled environmental conditions. House dust with known particle sizes (212–90, 90–45, and <45 μm) and allergen concentrations were sampled from new carpet squares with varying denier, pile height and pile densities. Dust mass and allergen recovery for total dust mites (Der p 1 and Der f 1), cat (Fel d 1) and cockroach allergen (Bla g 1) were assessed using the Eureka Mighty Mite (EURK), the High Volume Small Surface Sampler (HVS), or the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) method. Allergen concentrations were quantified using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays, and dust mass results were corrected for carpet fiber shedding. Samplers were compared by exploring mass collection efficiency (CE=fiber corrected dust mass/applied dust mass) and concentration ratio (CR=allergen concentration in collected sample/allergen concentration in test dust). Test dust allergen concentrations varied by particle size fraction due to varying laboratory performance over time. The EURK and HVS samplers had CEs of 41–63% in the small and medium particle size fractions, and collected less than 20% of the available dust from the large size fraction. The AIHA CE ranged from 10% to 17% in the medium and small particle size fractions, but collected little dust in the largest particle size fraction. The AIHA and HVS samplers were more likely to acquire more representative and less variable allergen CRs compared with the EURK method. Health studies that use allergen concentration as an exposure metric need to consider the implications of sampler performance when interpreting links to health outcomes and development of health-based standards for allergens in house dust.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AIHA:

American Industrial Hygiene Association (vacuum sampling method)

Bla g 1:

Major allergen of the German cockroach

CE:

Collection efficiency

CR:

Concentration ratio

CV:

Coefficient of variation (%)

Der f 1:

Dermatophagoides farinae allergen

Der p 1:

Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus allergen

ELISA:

Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay

EURK:

Eureka Mighty Mite

Fel d 1:

Felis domesticus allergen

HVS:

High volume surface sampler

RH:

Relative humidity

References

  1. Arbes SJ, Sever M, Vaughn B, Mehta J, Lynch JT, Mitchell H et al Feasibility of using subject-collected dust samples in epidemiologic and clinical studies of indoor allergens. Environ Health Perspect 2005; 113: 665–669.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Adgate JL, Ramachandran G, Cho SJ, Ryan AD, Grengs J . Allergen levels in inner city homes: baseline concentrations and evaluation of intervention effectiveness. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol 2008; 18: 430–440.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Krieger J, Jacobs DE, Ashley PJ, Baeder A, Chew GL, Dearborn D et al Housing interventions and control of asthma-related indoor biologic agents: a review of the evidence. J Public Health Manag Pract 2010; 16 (5 Suppl): S11–S20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Wilson J, Dixon SL, Breysse P, Jacobs D, Adamkiewicz G, Chew GL et al Housing and allergens: a pooled analysis of nine US studies. Environ Res 2010; 110: 189–198.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. IOM. Clearing the Air: asthma and indoor air exposures. National Academy Press Washington, D.C.. 2000.

  6. Topp R, Wimmer K, Fahlbusch B, Bischof W, Richter K, Wichmann HE et al Repeated measurements of allergens and endotoxin in settled house dust over a time period of 6 years. Clinical and Experimental Allergy: Journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology 2003; 33: 1659–1666.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Wang E, Rhoads GG, Wainman T, Lioy PJ . Effect of environmental and carpet variables on vacuum sampler collection efficiency. Appl Occup Environ Hyg 1995; 102: 111–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Lewis RD, Breysse PN, Lees PS, Diener-West M, Hamilton RG, Eggleston P . Factors affecting the retention of dust mite allergen on carpet. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 1998; 59: 606–613.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Lewis RD, Breysse PN . Carpet properties that affect the retention of cat allergen. Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology: official publication of the American College of Allergy. Asthma, & Immunology 2000; 84: 31–36.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Arlian LG . Arthropod allergens and human health. Annu Rev Entomol 2002; 47: 395–443.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Tovey ER, Chapman MD, Platts-Mills TA . Mite faeces are a major source of house dust allergens. Nature 1981; 289: 592–593.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. de Blay F, Sanchez J, Hedelin G, Perez-Infante A, Verot A, Chapman M et al Dust and airborne exposure to allergens derived from cockroach (Blattella germanica) in low-cost public housing in Strasbourg (France). J Allergy Clin Immunol 1997; 99 (1 Part 1): 107–112.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Chew GL, Higgins KM, Gold DR, Muilenberg ML, Burge HA . Monthly measurements of indoor allergens and the influence of housing type in a northeastern US city. Allergy 1999; 54: 1058–1066.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Vojta PJ, Friedman W, Marker DA, Clickner R, Rogers JW, Viet SM et al First National Survey of Lead and Allergens in Housing: survey design and methods for the allergen and endotoxin components. Environ Health Perspect 2002; 110: 527–532.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Mansour M, Lanphear BP, Hornung R, Khoury J, Bernstein DI, Menrath W et al A side-by-side comparison of sampling methods for settled, indoor allergens. Environ Res 2001; 87: 37–46.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. ASTM. ASTM F608-97. standard test method for evaluation of carpet-embedded dirt removal effectiveness of Household/Commercial Vacuum Cleaners. F1121. American Society for Testing and Materials International West Conshohocken, PA. 1997.

  17. Roberts JW, Budd WT, Ruby MG, Bond AE, Lewis RG, Wiener RW et al Development and field testing of a high volume sampler for pesticides and toxics in dust. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol 1991; 1: 143–155.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Dillion K, Heinsohn P, Miller D (eds).. Field Guide for the Determination of Contaminants in Environmental Samples. American Industrial Hygiene Association Publications. 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ramachandran G, Adgate JL, Banerjee S, Church TR, Jones D, Fredrickson A et al Indoor air quality in two urban elementary schools—measurements of airborne fungi, carpet allergens, CO2, temperature, and relative humidity. J Occup Environ Hyg 2005; 2: 553–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lewis R, Chen D . Indoor allergen surface sampling methods and standards: a review of the theory and the practice. J ASTM Int 2011; 8: 13.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Envirometrics. High Volume Small Surfaace Sampler (HVS3) Operation Manual, 204 [updated 2004; cited 2012 July 31]; Available from http://www.envirometrics.com/equip/HVS3manual.pdf.

  22. Lewis RD, Breysse PN, Sterling DA, King B . A soiling system for evaluation of house dust, allergens, and lead retention on carpets and other surfaces. Appl Occup Environ Hyg 1999; 14: 845–851.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Chapman MD, Heymann PW, Wilkins SR, Brown MJ, Platts-Mills TA . Monoclonal immunoassays for major dust mite (Dermatophagoides) allergens, Der p 1 and Der f 1, and quantitative analysis of the allergen content of mite and house dust extracts. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1987; 80: 184–194.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Wood RA, Eggleston PA, Lind P, Ingemann L, Schartz B, Graveson S et al Antigenic analysis of household dust samples. Am Respir Dis 1988; 137: 358–363.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Custovic A, Taggart SC, Woodcock A . House dust mite and cat allergen in different indoor environments. Clinical and Experimental Allergy: Journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology 1994; 24: 1164–1168.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Liccardi G, Barber D, Russo M, Canonica GW, D'Amato G, Senna G et al Effectiveness of vacuum-cleaning in removing Fel d 1 allergen from cotton fabrics exposed to cats. Eur Ann Allergy Clin Immunol 2007; 39: 167–169.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Adgate JL, Clayton CA, Quackenboss JJ, Thomas KW, Whitmore RW, Pellizzari ED et al Measurement of multi-pollutant and multi-pathway exposures in a probability-based sample of children: practical strategies for effective field studies. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol 2000; 10 (6 Part 2): 650–661.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Sullivan SD, Weiss KB, Lynn H, Mitchell H, Kattan M, Gergen PJ et al The cost-effectiveness of an inner-city asthma intervention for children. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2002; 110: 576–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Needham LL, Ozkaynak H, Whyatt RM, Barr DB, Wang RY, Naeher L et al Exposure assessment in the National Children's Study: introduction. Environ Health Perspect 2005; 113: 1076–1082.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. HUD. Vacuum Dust Sample Collection Protocol for Allergens. HUD Office of Health Homes and Lead Hazard Control. 2008.

  31. Colt JS . Comparison of pesticides and other compounds in carpet dust samples collected from used vacuum cleaner bags and from a high-volume surface sampler. Environ Health Perspect 1998; 106: 721–724.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Colt JS, Gunier RB, Metayer C, Nishioka MG, Bell EM, Reynolds P et al Household vacuum cleaners vs. the high-volume surface sampler for collection of carpet dust samples in epidemiologic studies of children. Environ Health 2008; 7: 6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Svendsen E, Thorne P, O'Shaughnessy P, Zimmerman D, Reynolds S . House dust collection efficiency of the high volume small surface sampler on worn carpets. J Occup Environ Hyg 2006; 3: 334–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Causer SM, Lewis RD, Batek JM, Ong KH . Influence of wear, pile height, and cleaning method on removal of mite allergen from carpet. J Occup Environ Hyg 2004; 1: 237–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Causer SM, Shorter CL, Lewis RD, Siebers RW . Efficiency of vacuuming for the removal of cat allergen (Fel d 1) from worn and unworn wool carpets of different construction. Text Res J 2008; 78: 105–110.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Adgate JL, Willis RD, Buckley TJ, Chow JC, Watson JG, Rhoads GG et al Chemical mass balance source apportionment of lead in house dust. Environ Sci Technol 1998; 32: 108–114.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Lioy PJ, Freeman NC, Millette JR . Dust: a metric for use in residential and building exposure assessment and source characterization. Environ Health Perspect 2002; 110: 969 83.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Whitehead T, Metayer C, Buffler P, Rappaport SM . Estimating exposures to indoor contaminants using residential dust. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol 2011; 21: 549–564.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the Healthy Homes Technical Study Grant MNLHH0153-06 from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Mention of commercial services or brands does not imply endorsement by HUD or the Universities of Colorado or Minnesota.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, Colorado School of Public Health, Aurora, CO, USA

    John L Adgate & Lisa M McKenzie

  2. Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    Sudipto Banerjee

  3. Division of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    Mei Wang, Jooyeon Hwang, Sook Ja Cho & Gurumurthy Ramachandran

Authors
  1. John L Adgate
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sudipto Banerjee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mei Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lisa M McKenzie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jooyeon Hwang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sook Ja Cho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Gurumurthy Ramachandran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John L Adgate.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Adgate, J., Banerjee, S., Wang, M. et al. Performance of dust allergen carpet samplers in controlled laboratory studies. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol 23, 385–391 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/jes.2012.112

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/jes.2012.112

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links