Skip to main content

Table 5 Mean PM 2.5 concentrations measured in smoking and nonsmoking casino areas and the outdoors

From: Small proportions of actively-smoking patrons and high PM2.5 levels in southern California tribal casinos: support for smoking bans or designated smoking areas

  

PM2.5Concentration,c μg/m3

 

Casinoa

Type of Nonsmoking Areab

Smoking Area, S

Nonsmoking Area, NS

S-NS Difference

Outdoorsc

NS-Outdoors Difference

Date of Visitf

A

Open

94

32

62

2.4

30

2/09/08

B

Open (Partial)d

74

10

64

4.2

5.6

3/28/08

C

Open

62

57

5.2

1.3

56

3/29/08

D

Open (Partial)e

76

25

51

1.3

23

2/09/08

E

Enclosed

72

6.5c

66

4.4

2.1

3/30/08

F*

Open

61

62

−1.5

4.7

58

10/15/11

G

Open

44

17

28

6.7

9.8

2/11/08

H*

Partial

57

20

37

2.9

17

10/15/11

I*

Enclosed

86

8c

78

1.9

6.1

12/11/10

J*

Partial

50

11

39

1.3

9.9

1/22/11

K

Partial

110

-

-

5.3

-

3/28/08

  1. aFor all casinos not marked with an asterisk, PM2.5 concentrations are the results of Jiang et al. [6]. For the casinos marked with an asterisk, PM2.5 concentrations were measured as part of the present study.
  2. b“Enclosed” nonsmoking (NS) areas were in a different room that had enclosing walls limiting direct air flow from smoking (S) areas; “Partial” (partially separate) NS areas were in a different room but had no barriers to air flow from the smoking areas; “Open” NS areas were in the same room and not physically separated from the main casino smoking areas.
  3. cA SidePak calibration factor of 0.29 was used for the original PM2.5 indoor measurements in Casinos F, H, I, and J (smoking or nonsmoking). This factor for SHS was determined through a controlled car-cabin (indoor) test and also corroborated with a field test inside a casino [20]. It is expected that the factor applies to all indoor locations, since SHS is likely the predominant aerosol in both smoking and nonsmoking areas. For outdoor aerosol, the factor’s value is assumed to be comparable. based on the work of others [20, 21], but could be higher depending on conditions. Regardless, since the absolute outdoor concentrations are small, any resulting error is expected to be low. For example, with an increase in the factor of 2/3, the concentrations would average 5.5 instead of 3.3 μg/m3, an increase of only 2.2 μg/m3.
  4. dThe Jiang et al. [6] study designated Casino B NS area as Partial, but on our trip it was determined to be Open. During our visit, the NS area was on the main floor off to the side of the main smoking area in a corner of the casino.
  5. eCasino D has a separate NS area that was closed during our visit but was visited by Jiang et al. [6].
  6. fDate of visit is given on which PM2.5 was measured in MM/DD/YY format. All visits took place on Friday or Saturday early or late evenings or in the early morning hours of the following day, except for Casino G, which was visited in the early evening on a Monday.
Back to article page

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us