OBJECTIVE: An analysis of airborne nicotine measurements collected in 49 low-income, multi-unit residences across the Greater Boston Area. METHODS: Nicotine concentrations were determined using passive monitors placed in homes over a one-week sampling period and air exchange rates (AER) were sampled using the perfluorocarbon tracer technique. Residents were surveyed through a questionnaire about smoking behaviour and a visual inspection was conducted to collect information on housing characteristics contributing to secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure. Using a mass balance model to account for the air exchange rate, volume of the home and sorption and re-emission of nicotine on indoor surfaces, the effective smoking rate (SR(eff)) was determined for each residence. RESULTS: Nicotine levels ranged from the limit of detection to 26.92 microg/m(3), with a mean of 2.20 microg/m(3) and median of 0.13 microg/m(3). Nicotine measurements were significantly associated with the number of smokers in the household and the number of cigarettes smoked in the home. The results of this study suggest that questionnaire reports can provide a valid estimate of residential exposure to tobacco smoke. In addition, this study found evidence that tobacco smoke contamination in low-income housing developments is not limited to homes with smokers (either residing in the home or visiting). The frequent report of tobacco smoke odour coming from other apartments or hallways resulted in increased levels of nicotine concentrations and SR(eff) in non-smoking homes, suggestive of SHS infiltration from neighbouring units. CONCLUSION: These findings have important implications for smoking regulations in multi-unit homes and highlight the need to reduce involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke among low-income housing residents.
OBJECTIVE: An analysis of airborne nicotine measurements collected in 49 low-income, multi-unit residences across the Greater Boston Area. METHODS:Nicotine concentrations were determined using passive monitors placed in homes over a one-week sampling period and air exchange rates (AER) were sampled using the perfluorocarbon tracer technique. Residents were surveyed through a questionnaire about smoking behaviour and a visual inspection was conducted to collect information on housing characteristics contributing to secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure. Using a mass balance model to account for the air exchange rate, volume of the home and sorption and re-emission of nicotine on indoor surfaces, the effective smoking rate (SR(eff)) was determined for each residence. RESULTS:Nicotine levels ranged from the limit of detection to 26.92 microg/m(3), with a mean of 2.20 microg/m(3) and median of 0.13 microg/m(3). Nicotine measurements were significantly associated with the number of smokers in the household and the number of cigarettes smoked in the home. The results of this study suggest that questionnaire reports can provide a valid estimate of residential exposure to tobacco smoke. In addition, this study found evidence that tobacco smoke contamination in low-income housing developments is not limited to homes with smokers (either residing in the home or visiting). The frequent report of tobacco smoke odour coming from other apartments or hallways resulted in increased levels of nicotine concentrations and SR(eff) in non-smoking homes, suggestive of SHS infiltration from neighbouring units. CONCLUSION: These findings have important implications for smoking regulations in multi-unit homes and highlight the need to reduce involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke among low-income housing residents.
Authors: Eleni C Digenis-Bury; Daniel R Brooks; Leslie Chen; Mary Ostrem; C Robert Horsburgh Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2007-11-29 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: B Brunekreef; B P Leaderer; R van Strien; M Oldenwening; H A Smit; L Koopman; M Kerkhof Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2000-05 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: Jorge Delva; Marisol Tellez; Tracy L Finlayson; Kimberlee A Gretebeck; Kristine Siefert; David R Williams; Amid I Ismail Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: B T Kitch; G Chew; H A Burge; M L Muilenberg; S T Weiss; T A Platts-Mills; G O'Connor; D R Gold Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Jonathan I Levy; L K Welker-Hood; Jane E Clougherty; Robin E Dodson; Suzanne Steinbach; H P Hynes Journal: Environ Health Date: 2004-12-07 Impact factor: 5.984
Authors: Rima Habre; Brent Coull; Erin Moshier; James Godbold; Avi Grunin; Amit Nath; William Castro; Neil Schachter; Annette Rohr; Meyer Kattan; John Spengler; Petros Koutrakis Journal: J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol Date: 2013-10-30 Impact factor: 5.563
Authors: Tianshi David Wu; Michelle N Eakin; Cynthia S Rand; Emily P Brigham; Gregory B Diette; Nadia N Hansel; Meredith C McCormack Journal: J Public Health Manag Pract Date: 2019 Mar/Apr
Authors: Gary Adamkiewicz; Ami R Zota; M Patricia Fabian; Teresa Chahine; Rhona Julien; John D Spengler; Jonathan I Levy Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2011-08-11 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Brian A King; Mark J Travers; K Michael Cummings; Martin C Mahoney; Andrew J Hyland Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2009-12-03 Impact factor: 4.244