Secondhand Smoke Exposure in Public Places in Guatemala: Comparison with other Latin American Countries

Abstract

Objective: To measure secondhand smoke levels in workplaces in Guatemala and to compare exposure to levels in other Latin American cities. Methods: Exposure was estimated by passive sampling of vapor phase nicotine using a filter badge. Filters were placed in 1 hospital, 1 school, 2 universities, 1 government building, the airport, and 10 restaurants/ bars. In total, 103 filters were deployed (plus 7 duplicates and 10 blanks). Nicotine (Mg/m 3 ) was measured by gas chromatography. Medians [interquartile ranges (IQR)] of nicotine concentrations were reported and compared with other Latin American cities. A survey about attitudes for smoke-free workplaces was distributed among employees. . Nicotine concentrations in bars and restaurants were 710 and 114 times higher, respectively, compared with hospital concentrations after adjustment for smoking ban signs, type of ventilation, and volume of the area. Support for smoke-free environments was high, except in bar/restaurant and airport workers. Airborne nicotine levels in Guatemala were similar to those found in other Latin American cities. Conclusion: In Guatemala, exposure to secondhand smoke is highly prevalent. Workers in bars and restaurants are disproportionately exposed to secondhand smoke compared with other workers. There is an urgent need for complete smoke-free legislation and for educating workers about the benefits of smoke-free workplaces. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16(12):2730 -5)

Second-hand smoke exposure in a sample of European hospitals

“…A pioneering study that measured airborne nicotine concentrations in 22 hospitals in seven European cities (Vienna (Austria), Paris (France), Athens (Greece), Florence (Italy), Porto (Portugal), Barcelona (Spain) and Ö rebro (Sweden)) during 2001-2002 showed low but detectable SHS exposure in hospitals [5,18,19]. Similar surveys conducted in 11 Latin American countries and China, including one hospital in each country between 2002 and 2006, also showed low but quantifiable nicotine concentrations [20][21][22][23]. In a previous study in Catalonia, Spain, low levels of airborne nicotine were found in 44 public hospitals before the new Spanish tobacco control law came into force in 2006, which subsequently mostly decreased to unquantifiable concentrations after the ban [6].…”

Protecting the World From Secondhand Tobacco Smoke Exposure: Where Do We Stand and Where Do We Go From Here?

“…Increasing evidence also indicates that SHS can infiltrate from separated smoking into nonsmoking areas in multifamily dwellings (Bohac, Hewett, Hammond, & Grimsrud, 2011;King, Travers, Cummings, Mahoney, & Hyland, 2010;Kraev, Adamkiewicz, Hammond, & Spengler, 2009). Furthermore, air monitoring results (using particulate matter [PM] and airborne nicotine levels as SHS markers) have consistently proven the industry's "accommodation program" and partial smoking restrictions to be ineffective in bars, restaurants, and casinos (Agbenyikey et al, 2011;Akbar-Khanzadeh, Milz, Ames, Spino, & Tex, 2004;Barnoya, Mendoza-Montano, & Navas-Acien, 2007;Erazo et al, 2010;Jiang et al, 2011;Kim, Sohn, & Lee, 2010;Lambert, Samet, & Spengler, 1993;Milz et al, 2007;Repace, 2009;Repace et al, 2011).…”

“…The most widely used methods for determining SHS exposure in indoor public places and workplaces are airborne nicotine and PM <2.5 µm (PM2.5) (Barnoya et al, 2007;Hyland, Travers, Dresler, Higbee, & Cummings, 2008;Liu et al, 2010;Lopez et al, 2008;Navas-Acien et al, 2004;Nebot et al, 2005). Airborne SHS studies generally measure nicotine for several days, reflecting time-weighted average concentrations over the period of assessment.…”

“…Multinational research has contributed to evaluate SHS exposure in public places and workplaces (Agbenyikey et al, 2011;Barnoya et al, 2007;Hyland et al, 2008;Jones et al, 2012;Liu et al, 2010;Lopez et al, 2008;Navas-Acien et al, 2004;Nebot et al, 2005;Schoj et al, 2010;Stillman et al, 2007). This research has shown the usefulness of measuring air nicotine and PM2.5 for SHS surveillance, support for policy initiatives, and implementation evaluation.…”

“…This research has shown the usefulness of measuring air nicotine and PM2.5 for SHS surveillance, support for policy initiatives, and implementation evaluation. For instance, Guatemala used airborne nicotine levels to work with Congress to have bars and restaurants included in the 2009 smoking ban (Barnoya et al, 2007). Furthermore, implementing common methods and similar protocols has allowed comparing SHS concentrations across countries.…”