Tobacco Induced Diseases (Mar 2018)

Comparing particulate emissions between electronic nicotine delivery devices: context for smoke-free indoor air quality

  • Zachary R. Dunbar,
  • Lisa Vogl,
  • Eric T. Jensen,
  • Maciej L. Goniewicz,
  • Mark J. Travers

DOI
https://doi.org/10.18332/tid/84296
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 16, no. 1

Abstract

Read online

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 PM 2.5 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 PM 2.5 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 PM 2.5 (µg/m 3 ) on average (µ=21.6, σ=7.82). The disposable device emitted the lowest amount of PM 2.5 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 PM 2.5 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 PM 2.5 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.

Keywords