Survey of residential indoor particulate matter measurements 1990–2019

Abstract

We surveyed literature on measurements of indoor particulate matter in all size fractions, in residential environments free of solid fuel combustion (other than wood for recreation or space heating). Data from worldwide studies from 1990 to 2019 were assembled into the most comprehensive collection to date. Out of 2752 publications retrieved, 538 articles from 433 research projects met inclusion criteria and reported unique data, from which more than 2000 unique sets of indoor PM measurements were collected. Distributions of mean concentrations were compiled, weighted by study size. Long‐term trends, the impact of non‐smoking, air cleaners, and the influence of outdoor PM were also evaluated. Similar patterns of indoor PM distributions for North America and Europe could reflect similarities in the indoor environments of these regions. Greater observed variability for all regions of Asia may reflect greater heterogeneity in indoor conditions, but also low numbers of studies for some regions. Indoor PM concentrations of all size fractions were mostly stable over the survey period, with the exception of observed declines in PM2.5 in European and North American studies, and in PM10 in North America. While outdoor concentrations were correlated with indoor concentrations across studies, indoor concentrations had higher variability, illustrating a limitation of using outdoor measurements to approximate indoor PM exposures.

Harm from Residential Indoor Air Contaminants

“…Our estimation of PM 10–2.5 concentrations, determined by subtracting PM 2.5 from PM 10 , introduces some uncertainty in interpreting the coarse fraction. However, our central tendency metric aligns well with the findings of Ilacqua et al, who compiled measurements of PM 10–2.5 from various studies. We observe that the PM 10–2.5 size fraction in dwellings is still under-reported in the literature, and it is common practice to derive this contaminant by subtracting PM 2.5 from PM 10 . , We estimate that the fraction of PM 10 attributed to PM 10–2.5 is 0.36, which is comparable to a value of 0.56 determined by in situ measurements in dwellings by Morawska et al, 0.46 by Ilacqua et al, 0.26 by Nishihama et al, and 0.19 by Morawska et al…”

“…Our estimation of PM 10−2.5 concentrations, determined by subtracting PM 2.5 from PM 10 , introduces some uncertainty in interpreting the coarse fraction. However, our central tendency metric aligns well with the findings of Ilacqua et al, 111 who compiled measurements of PM 10−2.5 from various studies. We CoCs are identified in Section 3.3 that account for over 99% of total median harm caused by indoor air contaminants.…”

“…Median with GSD. Black, current work; green-triangle = Logue et al, blue-triangle = Fazli et al, red-triangle = Morawska et al, , cyan-triangle = Ilacqua et al, magenta-triangle = Nishihama et al, yellow-triangle = Ye et al, green-square, dashes = Vardoulakis et al, blue-square, and dashes = Halios et al…”

“…Our concentrations of the 45 contaminants are broadly similar to those reported in other literature reviews. Here, we compare our meta-analyses with estimates from nine earlier studies. ,,,,− Figure illustrates their trends over the past 3 decades. There are some noticeable differences in the medians and in the overlaps of the GSD, but generally, there is good agreement between our results (in black) and the other studies.…”

Evaluation of respiratory function among homemakers exposed to indoor air pollution

“…The particulate matter developed due to indoor pollutants varies in all size and fractions, in residential environments and are free of solid fuel combustion. [ 16 17 27 28 29 ]…”