四种类型公共场所室内细颗粒物水平影响因素的研究  

Pollutions of indoor fine particles in four types of public places and the influencing factors

作　　者：刘波[1,2] 邓芙蓉[1] 郭新彪[1] 杨冬梅[2] 滕秀全[2] 郑旭[2] 高静[2] 董静[2] 吴少伟[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京大学公共卫生学院劳动卫生与环境卫生学系,100191 [2]北京市通州区疾病预防控制中心

出　　处：《中华预防医学杂志》2009年第8期664-668,共5页Chinese Journal of Preventive Medicine

基　　金：国家科技部“十一五”支撑计划（2006BA119B06） 志谢 感谢韩国首尔大学的LEE Kiyoung博士提供采样器和技术支持

摘　　要：目的了解公共场所室内细颗粒物（PM2.5）的污染水平，探讨其可能的影响因素。方法采用细颗粒物监测仪，监测北京市通州区洗浴休闲厅、餐厅、歌厅、网吧4类共计20家公共场所室内、外PM2．5的质量浓度，同时现场记录监测场所门、窗和机械通风装置的开启状态、室内人员数量及正在吸烟的人员数量等基本情况，分析多种因素对公共场所室内PM2.5水平的影响。结果公共场所室内PM2.5平均浓度为（334．6±386．3）μg／m^3，浓度范围6—1956μg／m^3，洗浴休闲厅、餐厅、歌厅包房、网吧室内PM25平均浓度分别为（116．9±100．1）μg／m^3、（317．9±235．3）μg／m^3、（750．6±521．6）μg／m^3、（157．5±98．5）μg／m^3，餐厅（与洗浴休闲厅比较：Z=-10．785，P〈0．01；与歌厅包房比较：Z=-10．488，P〈0．01；与网吧比较：Z=-7．547，P〈0．01）和歌厅包房（与洗浴休闲厅比较：Z=-16．670，P〈0．01；与网吧比较：Z=-15．682，P〈0．01）的污染状况比较严重。单因素分析显示吸烟人次密度（9．13×10^-3人／m^3；r=0．772，F=26．579，P〈0．01）和通风评分[（2．5±1．5）分；r=0．667，F=14．442，P〈0．01]与室内PM2.5，平均浓度相关；餐厅[室内PM2.5，平均浓度为（317．9±235．3）μg／m^3；室外为（67．8±78．9）μg／m^3]和网吧[室内PM2.5平均浓度为（157．5±98．5）μg／m^3；室外为（67．7±43．7）μg／m^3]室内、外PM2.5，平均浓度存在相关关系（r值分别为0．918、0．955，F值分别为16．013、30．785，P值分别为0．028、0．012），网吧中人次密度（288．7×10^-3人／m^3）和室内PM25平均浓度[（157．5±98．5）μg／m^3]相关（r=0．891，F=11．615，P=0．042）。多重回归分析显示影响公共场所室内PM2.5，污染水平的主要因素是吸烟人次密度（b′=0．581，t=3．542，P=0．003）和室内通风状况（b′=-0．348，t=-2．1Objective To study the levels of pollutions caused by fine particulate matter（ PM2.5 ） in the public places and investigate the possible influencing factors. Methods A total of 20 public places in four types such as rest room in bath center, restaurant, karaoke bars and cyber cafe in Tongzhou district in Beijing were chosen in this study; indoor and outdoor PM2.5 was monitored by TSI sidepak AM510. Data under varying conditions were collected and analyzed, such as doors or windows or mechanical ventilation devices being opened, rooms cramped with people and smoking. Results The average concentration of indoor PM2.5 in 20 public places was （334. 6 ± 386. 3 ） μg/m^3, ranging from 6 μg/m^3 to 1956 μg,/m^3 ; while in bath center, restaurant, karaoke bars and cyber cafe were （116. 9 ± 100. 1 ） μg/m^3, （317. 9 ± 235.3 ） μg/ m^3, （750. 6 ± 521.6 ） μg/m^3 and （ 157.5 ± 98.5 ） μg/m^3 respectively. The concentrations of PM2.5 in restaurant （compared with bath center： Z = -10. 785, P 〈 0. 01; compared with karaoke bars： Z= - 10. 488 ,P 〈0. 01 ; compared with cyber care： Z = -7. 547 ,P 〈0. 01 ） and karaoke bars （ compared with bath center： Z = - 16. 670, P 〈 0. 01 ; compared with cyber cafe： Z = - 15. 682, P 〈 0. 01 ） were much higher than those in other two places. Single-factor analysis revealed that the average concentration of indoor PM2.5 in 20 public places was associated with the number of smokers per cube meters （9. 13 × 10^-3;r = 0. 772, F = 26. 579, P 〈 0. 01 ） and ventilation score [ （ 2. 5 ± 1.5 ） points ; r = 0. 667, F = 14. 442, P 〈 0. 01 ] , and there were significant correlation between the average indoor and outdoor levels in restaurant [ （317.9 ± 235.3 ） μg/m^3, （ 67.8 ± 78.9 ） μg/m^3 ; r = 0. 918, F = 16. 013, P = 0. 028 ] and cyber care [（157.5 ± 98.5） μg/m^3, （67.7 ± 43.7） μg/m^3; r= 0.955, F= 30.785, P= 0.012]. Furthermore, significant correlation was observed between the average concentration of indoo

关 键 词：空气污染物 环境 环境监测 评价研究 

分 类 号：R126.4[医药卫生—环境卫生学]