Abstract
Abstract
Background
Microsensors have been used for the high-resolution particulate matter (PM) monitoring.
Objectives
This study applies PM and health microsensors with the objective of assessing the peak exposure, sources, and immediate health impacts of PM2.5 and PM1 in two Asian countries.
Methods
Exposure assessment and health evaluation were carried out for 50 subjects in 2018 and 2019 in Bandung, Indonesia and for 55 subjects in 2019 and 2020 in Kaohsiung, Taiwan. Calibrated AS-LUNG sets and medical-certified RootiRx® sensors were used to assess PM and heart-rate variability (HRV), respectively.
Results
Overall, the 5-min mean exposure of PM2.5 and PM1 was 30.4 ± 20.0 and 27.0 ± 15.7 µg/m3 in Indonesia and 14.9 ± 11.2 and 13.9 ± 9.8 µg/m3 in Taiwan, respectively. The maximum 5-min peak PM2.5 and PM1 exposures were 473.6 and 154.0 µg/m3 in Indonesia and 467.4 and 217.7 µg/m3 in Taiwan, respectively. Community factories and mosquito coil burning are the two most important exposure sources, resulting in, on average, 4.73 and 5.82 µg/m3 higher PM2.5 exposure increments for Indonesian subjects and 10.1 and 9.82 µg/m3 higher PM2.5 exposure for Taiwanese subjects compared to non-exposure periods, respectively. Moreover, agricultural waste burning and incense burning were another two important exposure sources, but only in Taiwan. Furthermore, 5-min PM2.5 and PM1 exposure had statistically significantly immediate impacts on the HRV indices and heart rates of all subjects in Taiwan and the scooter subjects in Indonesia with generalized additive mixed models. The HRV change for a 10 µg/m3 increase in PM2.5 and PM1 ranged from −0.9% to −2.5% except for ratio of low-high frequency, with greater impacts associated with PM1 than PM2.5 in both countries.
Impact statement
This work highlights the ability of microsensors to capture high peaks of PM2.5 and PM1, to identify exposure sources through the integration of activity records, and to assess immediate changes in heart rate variability for a panel of approximately 50 subjects in Indonesia and Taiwan. This study stands out as one of the few to demonstrate the immediate health impacts of peak PM, complementing to the short-term (days or weeks) or long-term effects (months or longer) assessed in most epidemiological studies. The technology/methodology employed offer great potential for researchers in the resource-limited countries with high PM2.5 and PM1 levels.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference65 articles.
1. World Meteorological Organization (WMO) An update on low-cost sensors for the measurement of atmospheric composition. 2020; Available from: https://library.wmo.int/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=21508
2. Morawska L, Thai PK, Liu X, Asumadu-Sakyi A, Ayoko G, Bartonova A, et al. Applications of low-cost sensing technologies for air quality monitoring and exposure assessment: How far have they gone? Environ Int. 2018;116:286–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.04.018
3. GBD 2019 Risk Factors Collaborators. Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020;396:1223–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30752-2
4. IQAir Group. World Air Quality Report 2021, region & city PM2.5 ranking. 2022; Available from: file:///C:/Users/ASUS%20W480/Downloads/world-air-quality-report-2021-en.pdf
5. World Health Organization (WHO). WHO global air quality guidelines: Particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), ozone, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide. 2021; Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240034228