181106
Smoking policies and secondhand smoke in rental cars
Monday, October 27, 2008: 8:45 AM
Georg E. Matt, PhD
,
Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA
Penelope J.E. Quintana, PhD, MPH
,
Graduate School of Public Health, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA
Romina Romero, MPH
,
Division of Health Promotion, San Diego State University/University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA
Joy M. Zakarian, MPH
,
Measurement & Evaluation Research Group, San Diego State University Research Foundation, San Diego, CA
Mauricio G. Aguilar, BA
,
Measurement & Evaluation Research Group, San Diego State University Research Foundation, San Diego, CA
Dale A. Chatfield, PhD
,
Department of Chemistry, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA
Melbourne F. Hovell, PhD, MPH
,
San Diego State University, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA
Objectives. Smoking cigarettes in a car can cause high air concentrations of SHS pollutants and residual contamination. Although many rental car companies attempt to protect customers by designating some or all of their cars “non-smoking,” it is unknown if these efforts are successful. This study is the first to examine the prevalence and level of SHS contamination in rental cars. Design. We will sample 105 cars from national companies and 105 from local companies; requesting a car in which smoking is allowed for 20% of rentals, a designated nonsmoker car for 40%, and without specifying a preference for 40% (“unknown”). Surface wipe, air, and dust samples are collected to measure concentrations of nicotine, 3-ethenylpyridine (3EP), and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The cars are inspected for detectable signs of tobacco use including odor, ashes, and burn marks. Interviews regarding smoking policies are conducted with company representatives. Results. Preliminary analyses (n=70) indicated that cars designated as nonsmoking did not exhibit fewer detectable signs of tobacco use than smoker or “unknown” cars. Residual secondhand smoke was detected in 50% of non-smoker, 71% of smoker, and 64% of “unknown” cars. Of the contaminated cars, the geometric means and 95% CIs for surface nicotine (mg/m2)were non-smoker: 2.53 (1.23;4.57), “unknown”: 5.71 (2.69;11.21), and smoker: 7.79 (3.10;17.86). Neither the non-smoker nor the “unknown” cars' nicotine concentration levels differed significantly from the requested smoker cars. Conclusion. Voluntary smoking policies put in place by car rental companies do not appear to create SHS-free car environments.
Learning Objectives: 1. Identify three potential pathways of exposure to tobacco smoke pollution in rental cars, in absence of active smoking.
2. Describe differences in contamination, if any, between cars designated as nonsmoking, smoking, and “unknown” cars.
Presenting author's disclosure statement:Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: I have collected this data, run the analyses, wrote this presentation, and presented on this material in previous conferences
Any relevant financial relationships? No
I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines,
and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed
in my presentation.
|