A comparison of submicrometer particle dose between Australian and Italian people

Buonanno, Giorgio; Morawska, Lidia; Stabile, Luca; Wang, L.; Giovinco, Gaspare

doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2012.03.002

Cited by 76 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, these values seemed to be lower than typical daily dose values found in previous studies as, for example, values higher than 2 × 10 3 mm 2 ·day −1 were found by [70]. This could be attributed to the selected population of this study, since students are typically less exposed to cooking-generated particles, which are known to highly affect daily particle exposure.…”

Section: Alveolar and Tracheobronchial Particle Dose In The Shs And Bcontrasting

confidence: 51%

“…The lung deposited particle surface area concentrations at the mainstream, regardless of the deposition in the lung tract, are extremely higher than particle concentration levels which people are exposed to in typical indoor, outdoor, and occupational environments [49,56,[66][67][68][69][70][71][72], thereby resulting in extremely high doses received by smokers as hereinafter reported.…”

Section: Alveolar and Tracheobronchial Deposited Particle Surface Arementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Particle surface area doses (expressed as sum of alveolar and tracheobronchial fractions) were 1.13 × 10 5 mm 2 ·day −1 and 8.85 × 10 4 mm 2 ·day −1 for male and female smokers, respectively. These huge dose values are larger than the overall daily dose in terms of surface area received by the non-smoking Italian population [56,70], and even larger than those received by people in highly polluted indoor environments, such as kitchens [49]. Table 3.…”

Section: Alveolar and Tracheobronchial Particle Dose In The Mssmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Tracheobronchial and Alveolar Particle Surface Area Doses in Smokers

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cigarette smoke is the main cause of lung cancer events. Mainstream cigarette smoke (MSS) is a direct concern for smokers, but also the secondhand smoke (SHS) contributes to the smoker exposure. In addition, smoker exposure is affected by the "free-smoke" particle exposure (B), related to the micro-environments where smokers spend time. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the daily alveolar and tracheobronchial deposited fractions of airborne particles for smokers as the sum of these three contributions: MSS, SHS, and B. Measurements of particle surface area distributions in the MSS were performed through a Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer, an Aerodynamic Particle Sizer, and a Thermo-dilution system on five types of conventional cigarettes. A Monte Carlo method was then applied to evaluate the most probable value of dose received during the inhalation of MSS by smokers. Measurements of particle concentrations in SHS and at the "free-smoke" particle background (B) were performed through 24-h monitoring at a personal scale of adult smoker through hand-held devices. This paper found that the total daily deposited dose for typical smokers was 1.03 × 10 5 mm 2 ·day −1 . The main contribution of such a huge daily dose was addressable to the MSS (98%) while SHS contributed 1.1%, increasing up to 2% for people smoking only while traveling in a car.

show abstract

Section: Alveolar and Tracheobronchial Particle Dose In The Shs And Bcontrasting

confidence: 51%

Section: Alveolar and Tracheobronchial Deposited Particle Surface Arementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Alveolar and Tracheobronchial Particle Dose In The Mssmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tracheobronchial and Alveolar Particle Surface Area Doses in Smokers

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In reality, the assessment of a person's individual exposurerisk is a complex task, related to a multiplicity of sources, microenvironments and personal lifestyles (Buonanno et al, 2011b(Buonanno et al, , 2012a. For example, in addition to systematically investigated outdoor sources/environments (e.g., trafficrelated and heating-related emissions in urban environments, urban background, rural background, sources in proximity to highway and industrial plants), indoor particle exposure should also be considered along with outdoor aerosol sources.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metrological Performances of a Diffusion Charger Particle Counter for Personal Monitoring

Buonanno

Jayaratne

Morawska

et al. 2014

Aerosol Air Qual. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Airborne particles have been shown to be associated with a wide range of adverse health effects, and have thus attracted an increasing amount of attention by medical researchers. However, accurate evaluations of the related exposure-doseresponse relationships are highly dependent on the ability to track people's actual exposure to airborne particles. This is quite a complex task, particularly in relation to submicrometer and ultrafine particles, which can vary quite significantly in terms of particle surface area and number concentration. It is thus necessary to develop suitable monitors that can be worn in order to measure personal exposure to these particles. This paper presents an evaluation of the metrological performance of six diffusion charger sensors, namely NanoTracer (Philips Aerasense) monitors, when measuring particle number and surface area concentrations, as well as particle number distribution mean, when compared to reference instruments. Tests in the laboratory (by generating monodisperse and polydisperse aerosols) and in the field (using natural ambient particles) were designed to evaluate the responses of these devices under both steady-state and dynamics conditions.The results show that the NanoTracers performed well when measuring steady state aerosols, although they strongly underestimated the actual concentrations during dynamic response testing. The field experiments also showed that, when the majority of the particles were smaller than 20 nm, which occurs during particle formation events in the atmosphere, the NanoTracers underestimated the number concentration quite significantly. Overall, even though NanoTracers can be used for personal monitoring of exposure to ultrafine particles, they have some limitations which need to be considered in order to obtain meaningful results.

show abstract

“…High frequency measurements of ultrafine particle number concentration (pnc) with mobile sampling devices such as the Philips Nanotracer [8] estimate personal exposure to ufps [3,4,9]. Such devices sample from a location on the person's body, rather than a fixed location in an environment where the person spends a large portion of time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%