Emily Gaston · Applied Spectroscopy 2020 · cross-sectional environmental sampling study · n=?

Microplastics Differ Between Indoor and Outdoor Air Masses: Insights from Multiple Microscopy Methodologies

Cited 320 times in the scientific literature.

Level 4 - case-series / case-control

Level 4 by design analogy (cross-sectional environmental sampling study without human clinical endpoints).

OpenAlex W3014408761 · doi:10.1177/0003702820920652 · record verified 2026-08-29

What was done

Air was sampled inside and outside buildings in coastal California by filtering known volumes of air through glass fiber filters. Microplastics were characterized and quantified using multiple methods: gross traditional microscopy, fluorescent microscopy after Nile red staining, micro-Raman spectroscopy, and micro-Fourier transform infrared (µFT-IR) spectroscopy.

What was found

Indoor air harbored higher microplastic counts than outdoor air, with 3.3 ± 2.9 fibers/m³ and 12.6 ± 8.0 fragments/m³ indoors versus 0.6 ± 0.6 fibers/m³ and 5.6 ± 3.2 fragments/m³ outdoors (mean ± 1 SD). Fiber length did not differ significantly, but indoor fragments (58.6 ± 55 µm) were approximately half the size of outdoor fragments (104.8 ± 64.9 µm). Micro-Raman identified polyvinyl chloride as the dominant indoor polymer followed by polyethylene, whereas µFT-IR identified polystyrene followed by polyethylene and polyethylene terephthalate.

Why it matters

The study shows indoor air contains higher concentrations and smaller fragments of microplastics than outdoor air, while highlighting that polymer characterization varies depending on the spectroscopic technique used.

Limits

The abstract does not state the total number of samples collected (n), sampling duration, or specific building characteristics. Geographic scope is restricted to coastal California. Differences between micro-Raman and µFT-IR polymer identifications reflect analytical discrepancies, and direct human exposure or health outcomes were not measured.

Cited by