TY - JOUR
T1 - Sampling Devices for Indoor Allergen Exposure
T2 - Pros and Cons
AU - Grant, Torie
AU - Rule, Ana M.
AU - Koehler, Kirsten
AU - Wood, Robert A.
AU - Matsui, Elizabeth C.
N1 - Funding Information:
Conflict of Interest Dr. Matsui reports grants from Inspirotec outside the submitted work. Dr. Wood reports grants from NIAID, DBV, Astellas, Aimmune, Sanofi, Regeneron, and personal fees from Up to Date and AAAAI, outside the submitted work. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest relevant to this manuscript.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2019/1/1
Y1 - 2019/1/1
N2 - Purpose of Review: To review current indoor allergen sampling devices, including devices to measure allergen in reservoir and airborne dust, and personal sampling devices, with attention to sampling rationale and major indoor allergen size and characteristics. Recent Findings: While reservoir dust vacuuming samples and airborne dust volumetric air sampling remain popular techniques, recent literature describes sampling using furnace filters and ion-charging devices, both which help to eliminate the need for trained staff; however, variable correlation with reservoir dust and volumetric air sampling has been described. Personal sampling devices include intra-nasal samples and personal volumetric air samples. While these devices may offer better estimates of breathable allergens, they are worn for short periods of time and can be cumbersome. Summary: Reservoir dust sampling is inexpensive and is possible for families to perform. Airborne dust sampling can be more expensive and may better quantify cat, dog, and mouse allergen exposure. Personal sampling devices may offer a better representation of breathable air.
AB - Purpose of Review: To review current indoor allergen sampling devices, including devices to measure allergen in reservoir and airborne dust, and personal sampling devices, with attention to sampling rationale and major indoor allergen size and characteristics. Recent Findings: While reservoir dust vacuuming samples and airborne dust volumetric air sampling remain popular techniques, recent literature describes sampling using furnace filters and ion-charging devices, both which help to eliminate the need for trained staff; however, variable correlation with reservoir dust and volumetric air sampling has been described. Personal sampling devices include intra-nasal samples and personal volumetric air samples. While these devices may offer better estimates of breathable allergens, they are worn for short periods of time and can be cumbersome. Summary: Reservoir dust sampling is inexpensive and is possible for families to perform. Airborne dust sampling can be more expensive and may better quantify cat, dog, and mouse allergen exposure. Personal sampling devices may offer a better representation of breathable air.
KW - Airborne allergen sampling
KW - Allergen in settled dust
KW - Indoor allergen exposure
KW - Indoor allergen sampling
KW - Personal allergen samplers
KW - Vacuum allergen sampling
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85061379123&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85061379123&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11882-019-0833-y
DO - 10.1007/s11882-019-0833-y
M3 - Review article
C2 - 30747291
AN - SCOPUS:85061379123
SN - 1529-7322
VL - 19
JO - Current allergy and asthma reports
JF - Current allergy and asthma reports
IS - 1
M1 - 9
ER -