"Green thumb" not welcome in the lab

Medical Laboratory Observer, March, 2005 by Barbara Harty-Golder

Q During a recent inspection, the inspector told us we cannot have potted plants in the lab because they are a contamination and bacterial risk. I have always heard that plants are good because they produce oxygen. Who is right? Can we have plants in the lab?

A The short answer to the question is "Not if the inspector says 'no.'" Your situation brings up the weakness of the inspection system: implementation of rules inevitably involves some degree of personal experience and subjectivity. In one particularly memorable week in a lab I was supervising, we had two inspections: the CAP inspection and an unannounced state inspection. The first inspector cited us for not using a distilled-water negative control for dipstick urines, and we immediately implemented the process. The next inspector was equally adamant that we did not need to do such a thing, although no citation resulted. We were, to say the least, confused!

In this case, it seems to me that arguments for and against having plants in the lab are a bit tenuous. Dr. David Miller of Carleton University in Canada, a specialist in workplace toxicology, discourages live plants because they may be a haven for mold if improperly cared for (especially if over-watered) and produce allergic or toxic symptoms in employees who are susceptible. Definitive studies that document the degree of risk are, however, somewhat lacking; practical experience indicates that this should be an uncommon event especially if flowering plants are avoided. Miller concedes that well-maintained plants do not produce mold problems.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

I have been unable to find convincing studies indicating that plants in the lab can produce specimen contamination or skew results--another possible basis on which the inspector may wish to exclude them. On the other hand, the amount of oxygen they produce is negligible, so unless you are planning to plant a forest behind the lab bench, there is no scientific reason to have plants in the lab, either. Interestingly, quite a few studies support the utility of plants in the workplace from a staff-management perspective: plants improve overall mood and morale and have been shown to have a positive effect on productivity--always a good thing.

It is best to take a different tack if you really want to keep the plants. If you are to be cited for noncompliance with a rule forbidding plants, it is fair to ask the inspector to cite the rule and any studies on which he relied in making the judgment that the presence of plants compromises compliance. Absent such substantiation, you may wish to challenge the citation, and you may well succeed, particularly if you take the following steps:

* Provide a response that includes documentation of the positive effects of plants in the workplace;

* Develop a policy that limits plants to areas in which accidental dirt spills and falling leaves will not be a problem (e.g., desk areas rather than workbenches);

* Establish a maintenance routine (watering on a proper schedule so that mold is not a problem, feeding, and culling of dead plants); and

* Remove plants if complaints relative to allergy or toxicity (e.g., headache, nasal congestion, or fatigue) are noted in staff.

Because mold contamination is a "hot" environmental concern, you may wish to either eliminate plants to avoid a potential problem or monitor for mold contamination regularly. (Just for the record, carpeting, walls, insulation, and heating/air conditioning ducts are far more likely and serious sources of problematic mold.) You can always take Dr. Miller's advice that "a plastic plant is your best bet," although in that case you must commit to regularly cleaning the plants to avoid a dust hazard, which really can interfere with instrument operation.

By Barbara Harty-Golder, MD, JD

Barbara Harty-Golder is a pathologist-attorney consultant in Chattanooga, TN. She maintains a law practice with a special interest in medical law. She writes and lectures extensively on healthcare law, risk management, and human resource management.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

MLO's "Liability and the Lab" is intended to provide risk management and human resource management education; it is not intended to provide specific legal advice. If you require legal advice, the services of an attorney should be sought. Dr. Harty-Golder welcomes your questions, which can be sent to her at toadehall@comcast.net.