Page:NIOSH Hazard review of Carbonless Copy Paper.pdf/77

---

Table 4–3(Continued). Summary of cross-sectional studies that used questionnaires to assess the health effects of indoor air contaminants in general or CCP specifically

	Study	Country	Methods	CCP-exposed workers			Results
				Number responding to survey[1]	Workers with complaints
					Number	%
	Pryor et al. 1983	United States	Authors surveyed 8 workers in municipal court office and 8 age and sex-matched controls in accounting office.	8	Unknown	Unknown	Eye, nasal, and throat complaints were higher in CCP exposed workers than in controls, but numbers were too small for meaningful comparison.
	Olsen and Mørck 1985	Denmark	Authors surveyed employees of 2 form-printing shops.	129	40	31	31% reported skin and mucous membrane symptoms; 22.5% reported skin symptoms only.
	Omland et al. 1993	Denmark	Authors surveyed 20 government office workers handling large amounts of CCP and a comparison group of 20.	20	10	50	Increased incidences of pruritus (P=0.007) and skin irritation (P=0.03) were associated with CCP. A dose-response relationship was established between pruritus and increased handling of CCP (P=0.049).
	Apol and Thoburn 1986	United States	Authors surveyed 65 employees making CCP. Ambient evaluation was also performed.	65	Unknown	—	No numbers were presented. Maintenance workers in the coater area reported the most problems; 4 men reported pulmonary symptoms consistent with exposure to diisocyanates.

1. The number of CCP-exposed workers surveyed was not generally known except for those responding to the surveys; therefore, response rates were unknown.