Objective To investigate the implementation effect of the Hygienic Indicators and Limits for Public Places (GB 37488- 2019) (hereinafter referred to as the Standard).

Methods Focusing on the implementation, applicability, and coordination of the Standard, the simple random sampling method was adopted on the professionals and the public engaged in law enforcement, monitoring or testing in public places among 371 health supervision agencies, 261 disease control agencies, and 71 third-party testing institutions in 28 prefecture-level cities in 8 provinces in eastern, southern, western, northern, and central China. The implementation effect of and suggestions on the Standard were investigated by means of electronic questionnaire.

Results A total of 2 696 professionals from 703 institutions were surveyed, and 3 404 questionnaires were collected (708 of which were from the public). There were 35.58% (375/1 054) of personnel in the disease control agencies and 24.61% (345/1 402) of health surveillance staff not participating in the relevant training. In the process of daily health supervision and law enforcement in public places, 81.10% (1 137/1 402) of the supervison agencies carried out monitoring with reference to all requirements of the Standard; 2.35% (33/1 402) of the supervision agencies did not evaluate against the Standard. In health supervision agencies, disease control agencies, and third-party testing institutions, 1.57% (22/1 402), 0.57% (6/1 054), and 1.25% (3/240) of the respondents considered that the scope of application of the Standard was "not matching" with public places or the current level of industrial development, respectively; 1.07% (15/1 402), 1.90% (20/1 054), and 1.25% (3/240) of the respondents considered that there were new technologies and methods worth recommending in indicator detection in the Standard, respectively; 2.14% (30/1 402), 2.75% (29/1 054), and 2.50% (6/240) of the respondents considered that the technical indicators in the Standard were not comprehensive, respectively. The standard for Indoor Air Quality (GB/T 18883-2022) adjusts and tightens the limit requirements of three indicators including formaldehyde, benzene, and radon on the basis of the Standard. The Standard does not describe the limit requirements and test methods for fine particulate matter. The shortage of professionals was the main difficulty currently encountered by the health supervision agencies, disease control agencies, and third-party testing institutions.

Conclusion The implementation of the Standard has achieved good economic, social, and ecological benefits, but some of its provisions should be revised to better apply to working practice.