Cargando…
Exposure to Secondhand Tobacco Smoke at Airport Terminals
BACKGROUND: Airports may represent significant sources of secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure for both travelers and employees. While previously common smoking rooms have largely disappeared from US airports, smoking continues to occur outdoors at terminal entrances. SHS may be especially high at arriva...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6377972/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30853997 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/9648761 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Airports may represent significant sources of secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure for both travelers and employees. While previously common smoking rooms have largely disappeared from US airports, smoking continues to occur outdoors at terminal entrances. SHS may be especially high at arrival areas, since they oftentimes are partially enclosed by overhead departures, creating stagnant microenvironments. This study assessed particulate matter <2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5), a common surrogate for SHS, at airport terminal locations to evaluate both outdoor exposure risk and possible indoor drift of SHS from outdoor sources. METHODS: A convenience sample of nine airport terminal arrival areas in the US state of Florida was surveyed between February and July 2018. PM2.5 levels were assessed outdoors and indoors at terminal entrances and at control areas far into terminal interiors. We also examined the impact of smoking location on SHS exposure by correlating cigarette and passing vehicle counts with PM2.5 levels at terminals with contrasting proximity of designated smoking locations to terminal entrances. RESULTS: Although outdoor PM2.5 levels (mean 17.9, SD 6.1 µg/m(3)) were significantly higher than indoors (p < 0.001), there was no difference between indoor areas directly inside terminal entrances and areas much further interior (mean 8.8, SD 2.6 vs mean 8.5, SD 3.0 µg/m(3), p=0.49). However, when smoking areas were in close proximity to terminal entrances, the number of lit cigarettes and vehicular traffic per minute predicted 70% of the variance of PM2.5 levels (p < 0.001), which was attributable mostly to the cigarette number (β = 0.83; 95% CI (0.55 to 1.11); p < 0.001). This effect was not observed at smoking areas further away. CONCLUSION: PM2.5 data did not suggest indoor drift from outside smoking. Nevertheless, absolute exposure outdoors was high and correlated with the location of designated smoking areas. Further studies are needed to examine the effect of microclimate formation on exposure risk. |
---|