ArticleAnnals of occupational and environmental medicine2026
Multiple chemical sensitivity triggered by an automobile mechanic's indirect exposure to volatile organic compounds in the Republic of Korea: a case report.
Article in Annals of occupational and environmental medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMultiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) lacks definitive biomarkers, making differential diagnosis reliant on exclusion and symptom reproducibility. In automobile repair shops, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from cleaning agents pose risks not only to primary users but also to co-workers via indirect exposure. We report a case of MCS suspected to be triggered solely by bystander VOC exposure, highlighting the clinical significance of uncaptured peak exposures in Korea. CASE PRESENTATION: A 23-year-old mechanic experienced recurrent headaches, throat irritation, and nausea immediately after co-workers used aerosolized cleaners in a poorly ventilated workspace. Symptoms consistently improved when he was away from work. Routine clinical evaluations were unremarkable. Although the patient underwent surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis, the symptoms persisted specifically upon re-exposure, effectively ruling out structural otorhinolaryngologic causes. Mental health screening indicated only mild depressive symptoms, insufficient to account for the severity of the physical symptoms. The Quick Environmental Exposure and Sensitivity Inventory (QEESI) scores were in the "suggestive" range for MCS. While routine workplace monitoring (8-hour time-weighted average [TWA]) showed non-detectable solvent levels, the nature of aerosol application suggested uncaptured short-term peak exposures. Based on the distinct temporal relationship, the patient was placed under medical observation and assessed as fit for work with restrictions on solvent exposure.
conclusionsThis case highlights the role of indirect VOC exposure as a trigger for MCS symptoms even when routine TWA monitoring indicates minimal concentrations. The discrepancy likely stems from the brief peak exposures triggering central sensitization, underscoring the limitations of standard monitoring. Management strategies must focus on peak-exposure control and fitness-for-work assessments that mandate strict avoidance of organic solvents, regardless of average ambient concentrations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.