4.7 Article

Indoor exposures to air pollutants and allergens in the homes of asthmatic children in inner-city Baltimore

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
卷 98, 期 2, 页码 167-176

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2004.07.018

关键词

indoor air pollution; particulate matter; PM10; PM2.5; nitrogen dioxide; ozone; allergens; childhood asthma

资金

  1. NIEHS NIH HHS [P30 ES 03819, P01 ES 09606] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents indoor air pollutant concentrations and allergen levels collected from the homes of 100 Baltimore city asthmatic children participating in an asthma intervention trial. Particulate matter (PM), NO2, and O-3 samples were collected over 72 h in the child's sleeping room. Time-resolved PM was also assessed using a portable direct-reading nephelometer. Dust allergen samples were collected from the child's bedroom, the family room, and the kitchen. The mean PM10 concentration, 56.5 +/- 40.7 mu g/ m(3) is 25% higher than the PM2.5 concentration (N = 90), 45.1 +/- 37.5 mu g/m(3). PM concentrations measured using a nephelometer are concentration consistent and highly correlated with gravimetric estimates. smoking households' average PM2.5 and PM10 concentrations are 33-54 mu g/m(3) reater than those of nonsmoking houses, with each cigarette smoked adding 1.0 mu m/m(3) to indoor PM2.5 and PM10 concentrations. Large percentages of NO2 and O-3 samples, 25% and 75%, respectively, were below the limit of detection. The mean NO2 indoor concentration is 31.6 +/- 40.2 ppb, while the mean indoor O-3 concentration in the ozone season was 3.3 +/- 7.7 ppb. The levels of allergens are similar to those found in other inner cities. Results presented in this paper indicate that asthmatic children in Baltimore are exposed to elevated allergens and indoor air pollutants. Understanding this combined insult may help to explain the differential asthma burden between inner-city and non-inner-city children. (c) 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据