6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Air Pollutant Exposure and Stove Use Assessment Methods for the Household Air Pollution Intervention Network (HAPIN) Trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background:

          High quality personal exposure data is fundamental to understanding the health implications of household energy interventions, interpreting analyses across assigned study arms, and characterizing exposure–response relationships for household air pollution. This paper describes the exposure data collection for the Household Air Pollution Intervention Network (HAPIN), a multicountry randomized controlled trial of liquefied petroleum gas stoves and fuel among 3,200 households in India, Rwanda, Guatemala, and Peru.

          Objectives:

          The primary objectives of the exposure assessment are to estimate the exposure contrast achieved following a clean fuel intervention and to provide data for analyses of exposure–response relationships across a range of personal exposures.

          Methods:

          Exposure measurements are being conducted over the 3-y time frame of the field study. We are measuring fine particulate matter [PM  < 2.5 μ m in aerodynamic diameter ( PM 2.5 )] with the Enhanced Children’s MicroPEM™ (RTI International), carbon monoxide (CO) with the USB-EL-CO (Lascar Electronics), and black carbon with the OT21 transmissometer (Magee Scientific) in pregnant women, adult women, and children < 1 year of age, primarily via multiple 24-h personal assessments (three, six, and three measurements, respectively) over the course of the 18-month follow-up period using lightweight monitors. For children we are using an indirect measurement approach, combining data from area monitors and locator devices worn by the child. For a subsample (up to 10%) of the study population, we are doubling the frequency of measurements in order to estimate the accuracy of subject-specific typical exposure estimates. In addition, we are conducting ambient air monitoring to help characterize potential contributions of PM 2.5 exposure from background concentration. Stove use monitors (Geocene) are being used to assess compliance with the intervention, given that stove stacking (use of traditional stoves in addition to the intervention gas stove) may occur.

          Conclusions:

          The tools and approaches being used for HAPIN to estimate personal exposures build on previous efforts and take advantage of new technologies. In addition to providing key personal exposure data for this study, we hope the application and learnings from our exposure assessment will help inform future efforts to characterize exposure to household air pollution and for other contexts. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP6422

          Related collections

          Most cited references44

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Woodsmoke health effects: a review.

          The sentiment that woodsmoke, being a natural substance, must be benign to humans is still sometimes heard. It is now well established, however, that wood-burning stoves and fireplaces as well as wildland and agricultural fires emit significant quantities of known health-damaging pollutants, including several carcinogenic compounds. Two of the principal gaseous pollutants in woodsmoke, CO and NOx, add to the atmospheric levels of these regulated gases emitted by other combustion sources. Health impacts of exposures to these gases and some of the other woodsmoke constituents (e.g., benzene) are well characterized in thousands of publications. As these gases are indistinguishable no matter where they come from, there is no urgent need to examine their particular health implications in woodsmoke. With this as the backdrop, this review approaches the issue of why woodsmoke may be a special case requiring separate health evaluation through two questions. The first question we address is whether woodsmoke should be regulated and/or managed separately, even though some of its separate constituents are already regulated in many jurisdictions. The second question we address is whether woodsmoke particles pose different levels of risk than other ambient particles of similar size. To address these two key questions, we examine several topics: the chemical and physical nature of woodsmoke; the exposures and epidemiology of smoke from wildland fires and agricultural burning, and related controlled human laboratory exposures to biomass smoke; the epidemiology of outdoor and indoor woodsmoke exposures from residential woodburning in developed countries; and the toxicology of woodsmoke, based on animal exposures and laboratory tests. In addition, a short summary of the exposures and health effects of biomass smoke in developing countries is provided as an additional line of evidence. In the concluding section, we return to the two key issues above to summarize (1) what is currently known about the health effects of inhaled woodsmoke at exposure levels experienced in developed countries, and (2) whether there exists sufficient reason to believe that woodsmoke particles are sufficiently different to warrant separate treatment from other regulated particles. In addition, we provide recommendations for additional woodsmoke research.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Solid Fuel Use for Household Cooking: Country and Regional Estimates for 1980–2010

            Background: Exposure to household air pollution from cooking with solid fuels in simple stoves is a major health risk. Modeling reliable estimates of solid fuel use is needed for monitoring trends and informing policy. Objectives: In order to revise the disease burden attributed to household air pollution for the Global Burden of Disease 2010 project and for international reporting purposes, we estimated annual trends in the world population using solid fuels. Methods: We developed a multilevel model based on national survey data on primary cooking fuel. Results: The proportion of households relying mainly on solid fuels for cooking has decreased from 62% (95% CI: 58, 66%) to 41% (95% CI: 37, 44%) between 1980 and 2010. Yet because of population growth, the actual number of persons exposed has remained stable at around 2.8 billion during three decades. Solid fuel use is most prevalent in Africa and Southeast Asia where > 60% of households cook with solid fuels. In other regions, primary solid fuel use ranges from 46% in the Western Pacific, to 35% in the Eastern Mediterranean and < 20% in the Americas and Europe. Conclusion: Multilevel modeling is a suitable technique for deriving reliable solid-fuel use estimates. Worldwide, the proportion of households cooking mainly with solid fuels is decreasing. The absolute number of persons using solid fuels, however, has remained steady globally and is increasing in some regions. Surveys require enhancement to better capture the health implications of new technologies and multiple fuel use.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Indoor air pollution from unprocessed solid fuel use and pneumonia risk in children aged under five years: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

              Reduction of indoor air pollution (IAP) exposure from solid fuel use is a potentially important intervention for childhood pneumonia prevention. This review updates a prior meta-analysis and investigates whether risk varies by etiological agent and pneumonia severity among children aged less than 5 years who are exposed to unprocessed solid fuels. Searches were made of electronic databases (including Africa, China and Latin America) without language restriction. Search terms covered all sources of IAP and wide-ranging descriptions of acute lower respiratory infections, including viral and bacterial agents. From 5317 studies in the main electronic databases (plus 307 African and Latin American, and 588 Chinese studies, in separate databases), 25 were included in the review and 24 were suitable for meta-analysis. Due to substantial statistical heterogeneity, random effects models were used. The overall pooled odds ratio was 1.78 (95% confidence interval, CI: 1.45-2.18), almost unchanged at 1.79 (95% CI: 1.26-2.21) after exclusion of studies with low exposure prevalence (< 15%) and one high outlier. There was evidence of publication bias, and the implications for the results are explored. Sensitivity subanalyses assessed the impact of control selection, adjustment for confounding, exposure and outcome assessment, and age, but no strong effects were identified. Evidence on respiratory syncytial virus was conflicting, while risk for severe or fatal pneumonia was similar to or higher than that for all pneumonia. Despite heterogeneity, this analysis demonstrated sufficient consistency to conclude that risk of pneumonia in young children is increased by exposure to unprocessed solid fuels by a factor of 1.8. Greater efforts are now required to implement effective interventions.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Environ Health Perspect
                Environ. Health Perspect
                EHP
                Environmental Health Perspectives
                Environmental Health Perspectives
                0091-6765
                1552-9924
                29 April 2020
                April 2020
                : 128
                : 4
                : 047009
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ]Berkeley Air Monitoring Group , Berkeley, California, USA
                [ 2 ]Gangarosa Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University , Atlanta, Georgia, USA
                [ 3 ]Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University , Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
                [ 4 ]Department of Environmental Health Engineering, ICMR Center for Advanced Research on Air Quality, Climate and Health, Sri Ramachandra Institute for Higher Education and Research (Deemed University) , Chennai, India
                [ 5 ]Department of Environmental Health Science, College of Public Health, University of Georgia , Athens, Georgia, USA
                [ 6 ]Geocene , Vallejo, California, USA
                [ 7 ]Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University , Baltimore, Maryland, USA
                [ 8 ]Center for Health Studies, Universidad del Valle de Guatemala , Guatemala City, Guatemala
                [ 9 ]Department of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine , London, UK
                [ 10 ]Division of Epidemiology and Population Studies, Fogarty International Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
                Author notes
                Address correspondence to M. Johnson, Berkeley Air Monitoring Group, 1900 Addison St., Suite 350, Berkeley, CA 94704 USA. Telephone: (510) 649-9355. Email: mjohnson@ 123456berkeleyair.com
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4886-1534
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7873-4678
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6658-2627
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8613-5736
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0518-2934
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5905-1801
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5155-1580
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3077-5440
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8246-0542
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5142-0529
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8733-8749
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1511-812X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4573-074X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0714-2971
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8776-4200
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3891-126X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6424-1140
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1344-4412
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3468-9793
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1201-8529
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1106-8812
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4062-5788
                Article
                EHP6422
                10.1289/EHP6422
                7228125
                32347764
                682779c6-c248-4232-ba87-306884acf1ea

                EHP is an open-access journal published with support from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health. All content is public domain unless otherwise noted.

                History
                : 22 October 2019
                : 27 March 2020
                : 1 April 2020
                Categories
                Research

                Public health
                Public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article