Using time-resolved monitor wearing data to study the effect of clean cooking interventions on personal air pollution exposures.

BACKGROUND: Personal monitoring can estimate individuals' exposures to environmental pollutants; however, accuracy depends on consistent monitor wearing, which is under evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To study the association between device wearing and personal air pollution exposure. METHODS: Using personal device accelerometry data collected in the context of a randomized cooking intervention in Ghana with three study arms (control, improved biomass, and liquified petroleum gas (LPG) arms; N = 1414), we account for device wearing to infer parameters of PM2.5 and CO exposure. RESULTS: Device wearing was positively associated with exposure in the control and improved biomass arms, but weakly in the LPG arm. Inferred community-level air pollution was similar across study arms (~45 µg/m3). The estimated direct contribution of individuals' cooking to PM2.5 exposure was 64 µg/m3 for the control arm, 74 µg/m3 for improved biomass, and 6 µg/m3 for LPG. Arm-specific average PM2.5 exposure at near-maximum wearing was significantly lower in the LPG arm as compared to the improved biomass and control arms. Analysis of personal CO exposure mirrored PM2.5 results. CONCLUSIONS: Personal monitor wearing was positively associated with average air pollution exposure, emphasizing the importance of high device wearing during monitoring periods and directly assessing device wearing for each deployment. SIGNIFICANCE: We demonstrate that personal monitor wearing data can be used to refine exposure estimates and infer unobserved parameters related to the timing and source of environmental exposures. IMPACT STATEMENTS: In a cookstove trial among pregnant women, time-resolved personal air pollution device wearing data were used to refine exposure estimates and infer unobserved exposure parameters, including community-level air pollution, the direct contribution of cooking to personal exposure, and the effect of clean cooking interventions on personal exposure. For example, in the control arm, while average 48 h personal PM2.5 exposure was 77 µg/m3, average predicted exposure at near-maximum daytime device wearing was 108 µg/m3 and 48 µg/m3 at zero daytime device wearing. Wearing-corrected average 48 h personal PM2.5 exposures were 50% lower in the LPG arm than the control and improved biomass and inferred direct cooking contributions to personal PM2.5 from LPG were 90% lower than the other arms. Our recommendation is that studies assessing personal exposures should examine the direct association between device wearing and estimated mean personal exposure.

Long-standing LPG subsidies, cooking fuel stacking, and personal exposure to air pollution in rural and peri-urban Ecuador.

Ecuador presents a unique case study for evaluating personal air pollution exposure in a middle-income country where a clean cooking fuel has been available at low cost for several decades. We measured personal PM2.5 exposure, stove use, and participant location during a 48-h monitoring period for 157 rural and peri-urban households in coastal and Andean Ecuador. While nearly all households owned a liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) stove and used it as their primary cooking fuel, one-quarter of households utilized firewood as a secondary fuel and 10% used induction stoves secondary to LPG. Stove use monitoring demonstrated clear within- and across-meal fuel stacking patterns. Firewood-owning participants had higher distributions of 48-h and 10-min PM2.5 exposure as compared with primary LPG and induction stove users, and this effect became more pronounced with firewood use during monitoring.Accounting for within-subject clustering, contemporaneous firewood stove use was associated with 101 µg/m3 higher 10-min PM2.5 exposure (95% CI: 94-108 µg/m3). LPG and induction cooking events were largely not associated with contemporaneous PM2.5 exposure. Our results suggest that firewood use is associated with average and short-term personal air pollution exposure above the WHO interim-I guideline, even when LPG is the primary cooking fuel.