Wearable Ultrafine Particle and Noise Monitoring Sensors Jointly Measure Personal Co-Exposures in a Pediatric Population

Abstract

Epidemiological studies have linked both traffic-related air pollution (TRAP) and noise to adverse health outcomes, including increased blood pressure, myocardial infarction, and respiratory health. The high correlation between these environmental exposures and their measurement challenges have constrained research on how simultaneous exposure to TRAP and traffic noise interact and possibly enhance each other’s effect. The objective of this study was to deploy two novel personal sensors for measuring ultrafine particles (UFP, <100 nm diameter) and noise to concurrently monitor real-time exposures. Personal UFP monitors (PUFP, Enmont, LLC) were paired with NEATVIBEwear™ (Noise Exposure, Activity-Time and Vibration wearable), a personal noise monitoring device developed by the authors (Douglas Leaffer, Steve Doroff). A field-test of PUFP monitors co-deployed with NEATVIBEwear logged UFP, noise and ambient temperature exposure levels at 1-s resolution in an adolescent population in Cincinnati, OH to measure real-time exposures in microenvironments (transit, home, school). Preliminary results show that the concurrent measurement of noise exposures with UFP is feasible in a sample of physically active adolescent participants. Personal measurements of UFP and noise, measured prospectively in future studies, will enable researchers to investigate the independent and/or joint-effects of these health-relevant environmental exposures.

Exposure to ultrafine particles in children until 18 years of age: A systematic review

“…Of the 32 articles that fulfilled our criteria, 22 quantified UFP levels in children's specific microenvironments (Table ; Figure and ), while the other 10 studies that were selected measured children's personal exposure to UFP by means of active samplers carried by children (Table ; Figure ). Among the studies regarding microenvironment exposures, 18 (82%) referred to UFP levels in schools or nurseries, 3 referred to transport (2 to schools and 1 to baby prams), 1 considered the UFP levels in heavily trafficked streets, and 2 measured levels in homes .…”

“…All the studies dealing with children's personal exposure to UFP had a sample size close to 100 children (Table ), except for the studies performed by Dirks et al, Leaffer et al, and Both et al, who measured personal exposure in seven, two, three, and eight children, respectively.…”

“…Wangchuk et al estimated personal exposure of children from three different schools in Bhutan situated at three altitudes (1400, 1600, and 1900 m) and under different traffic conditions. Buonanno et al, Mazaheri et al Paunescu et al and Leaffer et al analyzed the personal exposure of children without dividing them into groups (Table ). Both et al studied the differences in UFP exposure between transport and the rest of the microenvironments and between children and adults.…”

“…Most of them had a low size limit between 10 and 20 nm (Table ) . Only the portable CPC (PUFP C200) showed a lower size threshold of 6 nm . The highest limit oscillated between 300 and 1000 nm, except for the portable CPC, which had a high end of 3000 nm (Table ).…”

“…Different CPC models were used in the rest of the personal exposure studies. Both studies by Dirks et al used the model 8525, with a size detection range of 20‐1000 nm, Leaffer et al employed the model 3007 with a size detection range of 20‐1000 nm, and Both et al used a PUFP C200, whose size limits were 6 and 3000 nm (Table ).…”