| Literature DB >> 22949497 |
Benjamin J Apelberg1, Lisa M Hepp, Erika Avila-Tang, Lara Gundel, S Katharine Hammond, Melbourne F Hovell, Andrew Hyland, Neil E Klepeis, Camille C Madsen, Ana Navas-Acien, James Repace, Jonathan M Samet, Patrick N Breysse.
Abstract
The complex composition of secondhand smoke (SHS) provides a range of constituents that can be measured in environmental samples (air, dust and on surfaces) and therefore used to assess non-smokers' exposure to tobacco smoke. Monitoring SHS exposure (SHSe) in indoor environments provides useful information on the extent and consequences of SHSe, implementing and evaluating tobacco control programmes and behavioural interventions, and estimating overall burden of disease caused by SHSe. The most widely used markers have been vapour-phase nicotine and respirable particulate matter (PM). Numerous other environmental analytes of SHS have been measured in the air including carbon monoxide, 3-ethenylpyridine, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, tobacco-specific nitrosamines, nitrogen oxides, aldehydes and volatile organic compounds, as well as nicotine in dust and on surfaces. The measurement of nicotine in the air has the advantage of reflecting the presence of tobacco smoke. While PM measurements are not as specific, they can be taken continuously, allowing for assessment of exposure and its variation over time. In general, when nicotine and PM are measured in the same setting using a common sampling period, an increase in nicotine concentration of 1 μg/m(3) corresponds to an average increase of 10 μg/m3 of PM. This topic assessment presents a comprehensive summary of SHSe monitoring approaches using environmental markers and discusses the strengths and weaknesses of these methods and approaches.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22949497 PMCID: PMC3639351 DOI: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050301
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Tob Control ISSN: 0964-4563 Impact factor: 7.552
Summary of microenvironments and the factors that govern how exposure occurs within them
| Microenvironments | Physical factors | Behavioural factors |
| Outdoors | Wind speed, wind direction | Proximity to smokers |
| Residences (indoors) | Room volume, window positions, door positions, HVAC | Room location of smoker(s), proximity to smoker(s) |
| Work/office/public building (indoors) | Room volume, HVAC | Room location of smokers, proximity to smoker(s) |
| Restaurant/tavern | Room volume, HVAC | Proximity to smoker(s) |
| Automobile cabin | Cabin volume, window position, air conditioning, driving speed | Arm position, seating position |
HVAC, heating, ventilation and air conditioning.
Summary of approaches for measuring environmental markers of secondhand smoke by chemical analyte and sampling method
| Chemical analyte references of representative studies | Sampling method | Comments |
| Airborne markers | ||
| Nicotine (vapour phase) |
Active, adsorbent-based; integrated Passive, filter-based; integrated |
Tobacco specific Majority of nicotine in secondhand smoke (SHS) is vapour phase Widely used tracer for SHS mixture of chemicals |
| Respirable particulate matter |
Direct reading Active, filter based |
Non-specific, many other indoor and outdoor sources Largest component of SHS Most particles in SHS are <1 micron in diameter |
| Carbon monoxide | Direct reading |
Non-specific, many other sources, particularly outdoor air Used in early SHS studies |
| 3-Ethenlypyridine (3-EP) |
Active, adsorbent based Passive, filter based |
Tobacco specific, pyrolysis product of nicotine Vapour phase Levels are typically lower than nicotine |
| Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons |
Direct reading Active: integrating Passive: integrating |
Class of hazardous chemicals, some of which are carcinogens Can be measured in particle and/or vapour phase Non-specific Sampling and wet laboratory analysis is expensive |
| Tobacco-specific nitrosamines | Active: integrating |
Tobacco specific Potent lung carcinogen Limited data on indoor air in field settings |
|
Other components Nitrogen oxides Aldehydes Metals VOCs | Various active and passive methods | Not tobacco specific, many other indoor and outdoor sources |
| Surface markers | ||
| Nicotine |
Dust vacuum samples Surface wipes |
Tobacco specific Measure of long-term exposure May be particularly relevant for children's exposure |
‘Direct reading’ refers to the sampling and measurement of an analyte in real time. ‘Integrating’ refers to the collection of a sample over some defined period of time, for which a time-weighted average concentration can be estimated. Active sampling refers to the use of a pump to draw air through a collection device. Passive sampling relies on diffusion.
Comparison of air nicotine and particulate matter monitoring
| Airborne nicotine (passive or active sampling) | Particulate matter (PM) (direct reading or active filter sampling) | |
| Timescale | Duration of sampling depends on the amount of nicotine in the air and sampling method (active vs passive). Active sampling generally requires several hours where as passive sampling may need 1–2 days to 1–2 weeks. For instance in a bar or nightclub where smoking is allowed 1 day of sampling is generally sufficient to provide a precise quantification of nicotine in that environment. For any location, a week of sampling has the advantage to provide a good estimate of time-weighted average concentrations. | Measurements are taken continuously and stored in memory as often as once per second for 6–14 h depending on batteries used. Longer sampling would require plugging in and securing the device. Allows for the examination of changes in secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe) over time. Allows for the measurement of peak concentrations that are not seen with integrated methods. Active filter sampling provides the total mass and can be used to identify specific chemical constituents measured over the sample duration. |
| Sensitivity | A sufficient amount of nicotine must be collected on the filter in order to perform quantification in the laboratory. Current laboratory methods are very sensitive allowing for the quantification of ≥0.0026 μg/ml of nicotine. For instance, 1 h of sampling is sufficient to detect an average concentration of 0.22 μg/m3 in an environment where this concentration is constant during the hour of sampling. Nicotine is highly sorbing relative to other SHS compounds. | Highly sensitive to tobacco smoke; the machine detects levels as low as 1 μg/m3 of PM while cigarettes emit large quantities of PM, about 14 000 μg per cigarette |
| Specificity | Highly specific to tobacco smoke. Tobacco is generally the only source of nicotine. | PM is not specific to tobacco smoke and there are many other sources of PM present at all times. Especially at low concentrations it may be difficult to distinguish tobacco smoke PM from other sources. Aerosol-specific calibration required. |
| Correlation between markers | Both are correlated with other SHS constituents. Especially in places where there is consistent smoking there is a good correlation between nicotine and PM2.5 with an increase of about 10 μg of PM2.5 for each 1 μg of nicotine. | |
| Communication | Because there is no safe level of SHSe the concentration of nicotine in the environment should be zero (ie, undetectable). Any level of exposure increases health risk, although the risk is substantially higher with increasing concentrations. Nicotine itself can be of health interest as it may have some cardiovascular effects. Comparisons of air nicotine concentrations in different locations, including smoke-free environments are powerful tools in support of smoke-free initiatives. Difficult to predict health risk associated with levels of nicotine concentrations in the environment. | PM2.5 has known direct health effects in terms of morbidity and mortality. There are existing health standards for PM2.5 in outdoor air (USEPA and WHO) that can be used to communicate the relative harm of PM2.5 levels in places with smoking. The continuous nature of sampling allows for the creation of real-time plots showing levels minute-by-minute, which can be powerful communication tools. |
| Cost | No expensive equipment to buy up front and minimal operating cost. Per sample laboratory costs including the filter badge are approximately US$40–$100. | High initial investment (approximately US$3000) but minimal operating cost. No per sample costs, that is no laboratory costs or consumables. Potential costs in labour for data reduction and analysis |
Modified from Avila-Tang, 2010.100
PM, particulate matter; USEPA, United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Studies reporting the particulate matter to airborne nicotine relationship (ratio) in indoor environments
| Location | Sampling method and time frame | N | Slope | Reference |
| 16 US cities, personal exposure | PM (RSP) and nicotine: active; collected together | 1498 | 10.9 |
|
| New York State, USA, homes | PM (RSP): activeNicotine: passive, colocated: 1 week | 47 | 9.8 |
|
| USA, railroads | PM (RSP): activeNicotine: active, collected together, 2 days | 306 | 8.6 |
|
| Norway, hospitality venues | PM (airborne dust) and nicotine: active, stationary, sampled in parallel | 48 | 7.1 |
|
| Metro Boston, USA | PM2.5: activeNicotine: passive, collected together, 2 days, only during public access | 57 | 9.1 |
|
| USA, truck cabs | PM2.5 and nicotine: active; sampling times comparable | 16 | 5.2 |
|
| Weighted slope |
|
|
All PM and air nicotine measurements were reported in units of μm/m3. Studies that used log transformed data or differing time frames for PM and nicotine were excluded.
Reported slope represents only residences with reported cigarette consumption. All residence (N=96) slope=10.8.
Reported slope excludes two largest points. Authors also present slope representing all data points, slope=14.8.
Nicotine collected using stand alone filter. Authors also collected nicotine inline after PM collection, slope using inline =5.5.
PM, particulate matter; RSP, respirable suspended particles.
Hierarchy of secondhand smoke exposure assessment using environmental markers for epidemiological studies