INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to examine the influence of indoor smoking bans on indoor and outdoor air quality at pubs and bars and to assess whether secondhand tobacco smoke (SHS) drifts from outdoor smoking areas to adjacent indoor areas. METHODS: Data were covertly collected from a convenience sample of 19 pubs and bars that had at least 1 indoor area with an adjacent semi-enclosed outdoor eating/drinking area. Using TSI SidePak Personal Aerosol Monitors, concentrations of SHS (PM(2.5)) were measured concurrently in indoor and outdoor areas before and after implementation of the indoor smoking ban. Information was collected about the number of patrons and lit cigarettes and about the enclosure of outdoor areas. RESULTS: Indoor PM(2.5) concentrations reduced by 65.5% from pre-ban to post-ban (95% CI 32.6%-82.3%, p = .004). Outdoor exposure to PM(2.5) also reduced from pre-ban to post-ban by 38.8% (95% CI 3.2%-61.3%, p = .037). At post-ban, indoor concentrations of PM(2.5) were positively associated with outdoor concentrations. After adjustment for covariates, a 100% increase in geometric mean (GM) outdoor PM(2.5) was associated with a 36.1% (95% CI 2.4%-80.9%) increase in GM indoor PM(2.5) exposure (p = .035). DISCUSSION: Indoor smoking bans are an effective means of improving indoor and outdoor air quality in pubs and bars, although the air quality of smoke-free indoor areas may be compromised by smoking in adjacent outdoor areas. These findings require consideration in efforts to ensure adequate protection of the health of employees and patrons at hospitality venues.
INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to examine the influence of indoor smoking bans on indoor and outdoor air quality at pubs and bars and to assess whether secondhand tobacco smoke (SHS) drifts from outdoor smoking areas to adjacent indoor areas. METHODS: Data were covertly collected from a convenience sample of 19 pubs and bars that had at least 1 indoor area with an adjacent semi-enclosed outdoor eating/drinking area. Using TSI SidePak Personal Aerosol Monitors, concentrations of SHS (PM(2.5)) were measured concurrently in indoor and outdoor areas before and after implementation of the indoor smoking ban. Information was collected about the number of patrons and lit cigarettes and about the enclosure of outdoor areas. RESULTS: Indoor PM(2.5) concentrations reduced by 65.5% from pre-ban to post-ban (95% CI 32.6%-82.3%, p = .004). Outdoor exposure to PM(2.5) also reduced from pre-ban to post-ban by 38.8% (95% CI 3.2%-61.3%, p = .037). At post-ban, indoor concentrations of PM(2.5) were positively associated with outdoor concentrations. After adjustment for covariates, a 100% increase in geometric mean (GM) outdoor PM(2.5) was associated with a 36.1% (95% CI 2.4%-80.9%) increase in GM indoor PM(2.5) exposure (p = .035). DISCUSSION: Indoor smoking bans are an effective means of improving indoor and outdoor air quality in pubs and bars, although the air quality of smoke-free indoor areas may be compromised by smoking in adjacent outdoor areas. These findings require consideration in efforts to ensure adequate protection of the health of employees and patrons at hospitality venues.
Authors: Caroline Oates Cobb; Andrea Rae Vansickel; Melissa D Blank; Kade Jentink; Mark J Travers; Thomas Eissenberg Journal: Tob Control Date: 2012-03-24 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Elizabeth D Nesoff; Adam J Milam; Lee R Bone; Frances A Stillman; Mieka J Smart; Kathleen S Hoke; C Debra M Furr-Holden Journal: J Ethn Subst Abuse Date: 2016-07-12 Impact factor: 1.507
Authors: Maria J López; Esteve Fernández; Giuseppe Gorini; Hanns Moshammer; Kinga Polanska; Luke Clancy; Bertrand Dautzenberg; Agnes Delrieu; Giovanni Invernizzi; Glòria Muñoz; Jose Precioso; Ario Ruprecht; Peter Stansty; Wojciech Hanke; Manel Nebot Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-08-01 Impact factor: 3.240