Flor tiles are decorative, decorative and decorative, but what happens when they get in the way of your health?
That’s the question that health care providers and consumers alike are asking as a result of a new study that examined how well flor tile replacement actually worked.
The results show that replacing flor at home is not the same as replacing flooring in a home.
Instead, it’s a less effective way to repair existing problems, according to a report published today in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).
The study, which surveyed 2,100 U.S. residents, found that about 75 percent of the flor removal patients experienced no significant health problems, while just 18 percent reported any significant problems.
“This is really the first report that we have from a U.K. hospital that really looks at flor replacement in the U.P.,” said Dr. Mark Reiss, a professor of medicine and director of the Center for Infectious Diseases at Harvard Medical School and one of the study’s authors.
In the U, most flor has already been removed from homes.
However, flor is still used in some commercial and recreational facilities.
“We were not able to find a study where people who had been treated with flor or floor were able to return to work after having their flor removed,” said Reiss.
The authors found that the health benefits of flor were largely offset by the risks of using flor, such as respiratory problems, gastrointestinal problems and infections, as well as the potential for bacteria to build up.
“It’s hard to do any research if you don’t know the health impacts,” Reiss said.
For patients with underlying health conditions, the study also found that patients were able get back to work in less than a month after flor was removed from their homes.
But this recovery did not translate to improved quality of life for those with other underlying conditions, including diabetes and high blood pressure.
“These are the kinds of issues that we know will persist over time, even after a major hospital or care center has removed all the floor,” Reisd said.
He said the researchers did not identify any long-term health effects from flor use, but that their study did show that some people who used flor could not return to a job that requires physical activity.
“If you look at the benefits of doing flor for a particular population, I think the numbers show that the numbers are very, very small, if any, for that population,” he said.
But he said it was important to consider the health implications of flors use.
“One of the things that we are interested in is whether flor actually improves quality of the health care system,” Reisse said.
“It does seem that it does improve quality of care, but it does not improve the outcomes for the people.”
More to come.
Follow @HealthDay on Twitter.