Asbestos hazard evaluation in Rhode Island schools

Our plain-English summary of Asbestos hazard evaluation in Rhode Island schools, by G.A. Faich (American Journal of Public Health, 1980).

The study

• Author: G.A. Faich
• Journal: American Journal of Public Health
• Published: 1980;70(2):162-4
• Cited by: 8 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher · Free full text
• In J-M's library: Johns-Manville's company medical library held a copy (J-M no. 004771).

Abstract

A statewide survey to identify and abate spray-on asbestos hazards in schools has been conducted in Rhode Island. Of 326 target schools, 24 (8 per cent) contained material confirmed in the laboratory to be spray-on asbestos. Overt hazards requiring major corrective measures were found in 4 (1 per cent) of the target schools. Simplified identification and reporting procedures allowed for the efficient conduct of the survey.

In plain English

This report described a statewide survey by the Rhode Island Department of Health to find and correct spray-on asbestos hazards in schools. The survey covered 326 public and private schools built in Rhode Island between 1950 and 1973. It began with training sessions in October 1977 and was completed in May 1978. School officials reviewed records, inspected buildings by eye and filled in questionnaires. Health Department inspectors then re-examined and took samples at every school that reported spray-on asbestos. By February 1978, 312 schools (96 per cent) had returned forms. Telephone follow-up showed that 53 schools had mistakenly reported other asbestos materials, such as tiles. Spray-on asbestos was confirmed in 24 schools (8 per cent). Of these, 15 showed no visible deterioration, 5 had minor deterioration, and 4 had a major overt hazard. Those four were dealt with by removal, sealants, or both. The author noted that schools reporting no asbestos were not checked by validation visits, but believed most overt hazards were probably found. The author concluded that simplified identification and reporting procedures allowed the survey to be run efficiently.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Statewide survey of schools: questionnaires completed by school authorities, followed by Health Department inspections and laboratory analysis of samples from schools reporting spray-on asbestos
• Who was studied: 326 target public and private schools in Rhode Island built between 1950 and 1973 (the table footnote says built or modified in 1950-1973); training held October 1977, survey completed May 1978
• Exposure: Spray-on asbestos material in school buildings (the article does not name a fiber type), classed as a 'potential' hazard when visibly intact and an 'overt' hazard when obviously deteriorated
• Main results:
  • 312 of the 326 target schools (96 per cent) had submitted completed forms by February 1978
  • 53 schools had wrongly reported non-spray-on asbestos materials, such as tiles and pipe coverings
  • Spray-on asbestos was confirmed visually and in the laboratory in 24 schools (8 per cent)
  • Of the 24 schools, 15 showed no visible deterioration and were classed as a potential hazard
  • 5 schools had areas of minor deterioration and were able to readily convert the hazard from overt to potential
  • 4 schools (1 per cent of target schools in the table) had a major overt asbestos hazard, including a gymnasium where asbestos surfaces had been carved and gouged
  • Abatement in the 4 schools with major overt hazards: removal in two, sealants in one, and a combination of both in the fourth
  • No information was obtained for 13 schools (4 per cent)
• The authors' conclusion: The author concluded that simplified identification and reporting procedures allowed the survey to be carried out efficiently
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The author named sensitivity as a major limitation: it is uncertain whether schools that did not report spray-on asbestos actually had none
  • The Health Department made no validation visits to check reports, although the author believed most schools with an overt hazard were probably identified
  • The completeness of the survey depended mainly on accurate reporting by local school authorities

Related studies

• Modeled exposure to tetrachloroethylene-contaminated drinking water and the occurrence of birth defects: a case-control study from Massachusetts and Rhode Island — A. Aschengrau, L.G. Gallagher, et al. (2018)
• Asbestos in New York City public school buildings--public policy: is there a scientific basis? — R. Wilson, A.M. Langer, et al. (1994)
• Airborne asbestos levels in school buildings in Italy — A. Campopiano, S. Casciardi, et al. (2004)
• Asbestos in Vermont schools: findings of a statewide on-site investigation — L.F. Novick, C. Rice, et al. (1981)
• Asbestos in Colorado schools — C.A. Baldwin, H.J. Beaulieu, et al. (1982)
• Update on asbestos in schools — G.G. Gilbert, C.S. Scatarige (1983)

Browse more research in American Journal of Public Health, or return to medical research.