A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Secondhand smoke drift: examining the influence of indoor smoking bans on indoor and outdoor air quality at pubs and bars. | LitMetric

Introduction: This study aimed to examine the influence of indoor smoking bans on indoor and outdoor air quality at pubs and bars and to assess whether secondhand tobacco smoke (SHS) drifts from outdoor smoking areas to adjacent indoor areas.

Methods: Data were covertly collected from a convenience sample of 19 pubs and bars that had at least 1 indoor area with an adjacent semi-enclosed outdoor eating/drinking area. Using TSI SidePak Personal Aerosol Monitors, concentrations of SHS (PM(2.5)) were measured concurrently in indoor and outdoor areas before and after implementation of the indoor smoking ban. Information was collected about the number of patrons and lit cigarettes and about the enclosure of outdoor areas.

Results: Indoor PM(2.5) concentrations reduced by 65.5% from pre-ban to post-ban (95% CI 32.6%-82.3%, p = .004). Outdoor exposure to PM(2.5) also reduced from pre-ban to post-ban by 38.8% (95% CI 3.2%-61.3%, p = .037). At post-ban, indoor concentrations of PM(2.5) were positively associated with outdoor concentrations. After adjustment for covariates, a 100% increase in geometric mean (GM) outdoor PM(2.5) was associated with a 36.1% (95% CI 2.4%-80.9%) increase in GM indoor PM(2.5) exposure (p = .035).

Discussion: Indoor smoking bans are an effective means of improving indoor and outdoor air quality in pubs and bars, although the air quality of smoke-free indoor areas may be compromised by smoking in adjacent outdoor areas. These findings require consideration in efforts to ensure adequate protection of the health of employees and patrons at hospitality venues.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntp204DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

indoor smoking
16
indoor outdoor
16
air quality
16
pubs bars
16
indoor
14
smoking bans
12
outdoor air
12
quality pubs
12
outdoor
11
influence indoor
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!