Elizabeth T Russo1, Thomas E Hulse2, Gary Adamkiewicz3, Douglas E Levy4, Leon Bethune5, John Kane6, Margaret Reid5, Snehal N Shah7. 1. Boston Public Health Commission, Boston, MA; erusso@bphc.org. 2. Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA; 3. Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA; 4. Mongan Institute for Health Policy, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; 5. Boston Public Health Commission, Boston, MA; 6. Boston Housing Authority, Boston, MA; 7. Boston Public Health Commission, Boston, MA; Department of Pediatrics, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Secondhand smoke remains a health concern for individuals living in multiunit housing, where smoke has been shown to easily transfer between units. Building-wide smoke-free policies are a logical step for minimizing smoke exposure in these settings. This evaluation sought to determine whether buildings with smoke-free policies have less secondhand smoke than similar buildings without such policies. Furthermore, this study assessed potential secondhand smoke transfer between apartments with and without resident smokers. METHODS: Fine particulate matter (PM2.5), airborne nicotine, and self-reported smoking activity were recorded in 15 households with resident smokers and 17 households where no one smoked in 5 Boston Housing Authority developments. Of these, 4 apartment pairs were adjacent apartments with and without resident smokers. Halls between apartments and outdoor air were also monitored to capture potential smoke transfer and to provide background PM2.5 concentrations. RESULTS: Households within buildings with smoke-free policies showed lower PM2.5 concentrations compared to buildings without these policies (median: 4.8 vs 8.1 µg/m(3)). Although the greatest difference in PM2.5 between smoking-permitted and smoke-free buildings was observed in households with resident smokers (14.3 vs 7.0 µg/m(3)), households without resident smokers also showed a significant difference (5.1 vs 4.0 µg/m(3)). Secondhand smoke transfer to smoke-free apartments was demonstrable with directly adjacent households. CONCLUSION: This evaluation documented instances of secondhand smoke transfer between households as well as lower PM2.5 measurements in buildings with smoke-free policies. Building-wide smoke-free policies can limit secondhand smoke exposure for everyone living in multiunit housing.
INTRODUCTION: Secondhand smoke remains a health concern for individuals living in multiunit housing, where smoke has been shown to easily transfer between units. Building-wide smoke-free policies are a logical step for minimizing smoke exposure in these settings. This evaluation sought to determine whether buildings with smoke-free policies have less secondhand smoke than similar buildings without such policies. Furthermore, this study assessed potential secondhand smoke transfer between apartments with and without resident smokers. METHODS: Fine particulate matter (PM2.5), airborne nicotine, and self-reported smoking activity were recorded in 15 households with resident smokers and 17 households where no one smoked in 5 Boston Housing Authority developments. Of these, 4 apartment pairs were adjacent apartments with and without resident smokers. Halls between apartments and outdoor air were also monitored to capture potential smoke transfer and to provide background PM2.5 concentrations. RESULTS: Households within buildings with smoke-free policies showed lower PM2.5 concentrations compared to buildings without these policies (median: 4.8 vs 8.1 µg/m(3)). Although the greatest difference in PM2.5 between smoking-permitted and smoke-free buildings was observed in households with resident smokers (14.3 vs 7.0 µg/m(3)), households without resident smokers also showed a significant difference (5.1 vs 4.0 µg/m(3)). Secondhand smoke transfer to smoke-free apartments was demonstrable with directly adjacent households. CONCLUSION: This evaluation documented instances of secondhand smoke transfer between households as well as lower PM2.5 measurements in buildings with smoke-free policies. Building-wide smoke-free policies can limit secondhand smoke exposure for everyone living in multiunit housing.
Authors: David L Bohac; Martha J Hewett; Kristopher I Kapphahn; Joshua Novacheck; David T Grimsrud; Michael G Apte; Lara A Gundel Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2012-12-13 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: N E Klepeis; W C Nelson; W R Ott; J P Robinson; A M Tsang; P Switzer; J V Behar; S C Hern; W H Engelmann Journal: J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol Date: 2001 May-Jun
Authors: Brian A King; Mark J Travers; K Michael Cummings; Martin C Mahoney; Andrew J Hyland Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2010-10-01 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Karen M Wilson; Jonathan D Klein; Aaron K Blumkin; Mark Gottlieb; Jonathan P Winickoff Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2010-12-13 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: C Arden Pope; Richard T Burnett; Michael J Thun; Eugenia E Calle; Daniel Krewski; Kazuhiko Ito; George D Thurston Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-03-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ting Zhang; Steven N Chillrud; Qiang Yang; Masha Pitiranggon; James Ross; Frederica Perera; Junfeng Ji; Avrum Spira; Patrick N Breysse; Charles E Rodes; Rachel Miller; Beizhan Yan Journal: Indoor Air Date: 2019-12-11 Impact factor: 5.770
Authors: Ryan David Kennedy; Stephanie Ellens-Clark; Laurie Nagge; Ornell Douglas; Cheryl Madill; Pamela Kaufman Journal: J Community Health Date: 2015-12
Authors: Sara E Gillooly; Yulun Zhou; Jose Vallarino; MyDzung T Chu; Drew R Michanowicz; Jonathan I Levy; Gary Adamkiewicz Journal: Environ Pollut Date: 2018-10-15 Impact factor: 8.071
Authors: Kanistha C Coombs; Ginger L Chew; Christopher Schaffer; Patrick H Ryan; Cole Brokamp; Sergey A Grinshpun; Gary Adamkiewicz; Steve Chillrud; Curtis Hedman; Meryl Colton; Jamie Ross; Tiina Reponen Journal: Sci Total Environ Date: 2016-03-05 Impact factor: 7.963