Site Home
Contact Us
å

iDEA: DREXEL LIBRARIES E-REPOSITORY AND ARCHIVES

iDEA: DREXEL LIBRARIES E-REPOSITORY AND ARCHIVES

Main sections

Comparison of PM 2.5 Samplers in Residential Environments

Details
Title
Comparison of PM 2.5 Samplers in Residential Environments
Author(s)
Widman, Shannon
Advisor(s)
Cummings, C. E. (Curtis E.)
Keywords
Public Health; PM2.5; Residential Environments
Date
2010-05
Publisher
Drexel University
Thesis
M.P.H., Public Health -- Drexel University, 2010
Abstract
Background: Research has shown that long-term exposure to particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less can result in adverse health effects including changes in respiratory function and in cardiopulmonary morbidity and mortality. This study sought to investigate potential contributors to heightened PM 2.5 concentrations in the home and to compare two PM 2.5 samplers that are commercially available and commonly used. Methods: This experimental study was performed in the homes of thirty-one Drexel-affiliated participants. The Sioutas Cascade Impactor (SKC Inc., Eighty Four, PA) and the Personal Environmental Monitor (PEM—SKC Inc., Eighty Four, PA) were run side-by-side for eight hours in the homes of the participants; PM 2.5 concentrations for each sampler were calculated following sampling. The resultant PM 2.5 concentrations were log-transformed to attain normality. A questionnaire was administered to gather data on housing characteristics and possible contributors to heightened PM 2.5 concentrations. Associations between contributors and observed PM 2.5 concentrations were assessed. Results: Variability between the Sioutas Cascade Impactor and the Personal Environmental Monitor was found to be statistically significant (p=0.015). The PEM was found to measure an average of two times higher PM 2.5 concentrations than the Sioutas, when sampling in the same environment. No statistical significance was observed among residences exhibiting different housing characteristics (p>0.05). Conclusions: The Sioutas appears to underestimate PM 2.5 concentrations, while the PEM measures higher PM 2.5 concentration in the same environment. It would be beneficial for this study to be expanded and continued, with samples taken in a larger number of homes in order to confirm the association. Additionally, it would be beneficial to use two of each sampler for comparison purposes.
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/1860/3607
In Collections
Theses, Dissertations, and Projects

Search iDEA

Advanced Search