Recent manuscripts
Archive
Editorial Board
Aims and Scope
Open Access
Indexing
Contact us
Authorship & COI
Principles of Transparency Checklist
Publication Ethics
Crossmark
Data Policies
Supporting Diversity
Instructions to authors (PDF)
Manuscript Types
Manuscript Formatting
How to submit
Special Publications & Reprints
Preprints
Comparing particulate emissions between electronic nicotine delivery devices: context for smoke-free indoor air quality
1
Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Health Behavior, United States of America
2
University at Buffalo, United States of America
Publication date: 2018-03-01
Tob. Induc. Dis. 2018;16(Suppl 1):A718
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Background:
Smoke-free indoor air policy has been widely adopted in some regions of the United States in order to protect bystanders from the deleterious effects of indoor tobacco smoke exposure; however, similar legislation has widely not been applied to ENDS devices. This study investigated differences in PM2.5 matter emitted into the indoor environment from a selection of ENDS products under controlled conditions.
Methods:
Sixteen smokers were recruited to vape in seven individual sessions (one visit per week). During each visit, participants vaped using one of seven different ENDS products. All vaping occurred within a dedicated exposure chamber. Volunteers drew twenty puffs on their assigned devices over a ten-minute exposure period. ENDS products tested included: disposable, e-cigar, vaporizer, rechargeable, e-pipe, and e-Go devices. TSI SidePaks were used to record both ambient and ENDS-associated unadjusted PM2.5 before, during, and after each exposure period. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 23.
Results:
The rechargeable device emitted the highest amount of PM2.5 (µg/m3) on average (µ=21.6, σ=7.82). The disposable device emitted the lowest amount of PM2.5 on average (µ=4.14, σ=1.09). The difference in PM2.5 matter in the smoking chamber during each session compared to ambient levels before each session was significant (p< 0.05) by paired t-test for all devices except e-pipe, which was borderline significant (p=0.053). The mean difference in PM2.5 emissions between the rechargeable device was significantly from e-cigar (p=0.048), e-Go (p=0.048), and disposable (p=0.021) products.
Conclusions:
This study found that ENDS devices emit levels of particulate matter into the indoor environment that are significantly higher than ambient PM2.5 levels. Further, significant emission differences were also detected between ENDS products. These findings suggest that incorporating ENDS products into existing smoke-free indoor air policy would protect non-users from side-stream exposure to ENDS aerosol.
Smoke-free indoor air policy has been widely adopted in some regions of the United States in order to protect bystanders from the deleterious effects of indoor tobacco smoke exposure; however, similar legislation has widely not been applied to ENDS devices. This study investigated differences in PM2.5 matter emitted into the indoor environment from a selection of ENDS products under controlled conditions.
Methods:
Sixteen smokers were recruited to vape in seven individual sessions (one visit per week). During each visit, participants vaped using one of seven different ENDS products. All vaping occurred within a dedicated exposure chamber. Volunteers drew twenty puffs on their assigned devices over a ten-minute exposure period. ENDS products tested included: disposable, e-cigar, vaporizer, rechargeable, e-pipe, and e-Go devices. TSI SidePaks were used to record both ambient and ENDS-associated unadjusted PM2.5 before, during, and after each exposure period. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 23.
Results:
The rechargeable device emitted the highest amount of PM2.5 (µg/m3) on average (µ=21.6, σ=7.82). The disposable device emitted the lowest amount of PM2.5 on average (µ=4.14, σ=1.09). The difference in PM2.5 matter in the smoking chamber during each session compared to ambient levels before each session was significant (p< 0.05) by paired t-test for all devices except e-pipe, which was borderline significant (p=0.053). The mean difference in PM2.5 emissions between the rechargeable device was significantly from e-cigar (p=0.048), e-Go (p=0.048), and disposable (p=0.021) products.
Conclusions:
This study found that ENDS devices emit levels of particulate matter into the indoor environment that are significantly higher than ambient PM2.5 levels. Further, significant emission differences were also detected between ENDS products. These findings suggest that incorporating ENDS products into existing smoke-free indoor air policy would protect non-users from side-stream exposure to ENDS aerosol.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1617-9625 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
