...
首页> 外文期刊>Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine >A randomized trial of air cleaners and a health coach to improve indoor air quality for inner-city children with asthma and secondhand smoke exposure.
【24h】

A randomized trial of air cleaners and a health coach to improve indoor air quality for inner-city children with asthma and secondhand smoke exposure.

机译:一个随机试验的空气清洁剂和健康教练来改善室内空气质量市中心的儿童哮喘和二手烟雾暴露。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To test an air cleaner and health coach intervention to reduce secondhand smoke exposure compared with air cleaners alone or no air cleaners in reducing particulate matter (PM), air nicotine, and urine cotinine concentrations and increasing symptom-free days in children with asthma residing with a smoker. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial, with randomization embedded in study database. SETTINGS: The Johns Hopkins Hospital Children's Center and homes of children. PARTICIPANTS: Children with asthma, residing with a smoker, randomly assigned to interventions consisting of air cleaners only (n = 41), air cleaners plus a health coach (n = 41), or delayed air cleaner (control) (n = 44). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in PM, air nicotine, and urine cotinine concentrations and symptom-free days during the 6-month study. RESULTS: The overall follow-up rate was high (91.3%). Changes in mean fine and coarse PM (PM(2.5) and PM(2.5-10)) concentrations (baseline to 6 months) were significantly lower in both air cleaner groups compared with the control group (mean differences for PM(2.5) concentrations: control, 3.5 mug/m(3); air cleaner only, -19.9 mug/m(3); and air cleaner plus health coach, -16.1 mug/m(3); P = .003; and PM(2.5-10) concentrations: control, 2.4 mug/m(3); air cleaner only, -8.7 mug/m(3); and air cleaner plus health coach, -10.6 mug/m(3); P = .02). No differences were noted in air nicotine or urine cotinine concentrations. The health coach provided no additional reduction in PM concentrations. Symptom-free days were significantly increased [corrected] in both air cleaner groups compared with the control group (P = .03). CONCLUSION: Although the use of air cleaners can result in a significant reduction in indoor PM concentrations and a significant increase in symptom-free days, it is not enough to prevent exposure to secondhand smoke.
机译:目的:测试一个空气滤清器和健康教练干预减少二手烟暴露相比之下,空气清洁剂单独或没有空气清洁工在减少颗粒物(PM),空气尿液尼古丁和可替宁含量增加对儿童无症状的日子哮喘的吸烟者驻留。对照试验,随机嵌入研究数据库。儿童中心医院和家庭的孩子。参与者:儿童哮喘、驻留抽烟,随机分配到干预措施组成的空气清洁剂(n = 41),空气清洁剂+健康教练(n = 41),或延误空气滤清器(控制)(n = 44)。措施:点的变化,空气尼古丁,尿液可替宁浓度和无症状的日子在6个月的研究。随访率高(91.3%)。细和粗点(点(2.5)和点(2.5 -10))浓度(基线6个月)在空气滤清器组显著降低与对照组相比(平均分歧浓度(2.5)下午:控制,3.5杯/ m (3);空气滤清器+健康教练,-16.1杯/ m (3);= .003;2.4杯/ m (3);和空气滤清器+健康教练,-10.6杯/ m (3);空气尿液尼古丁和可替宁含量。健康教练没有提供额外的减少在点浓度。显著增加(修正)在空气中清洁组与对照组(P= 03)。清洁剂会导致显著减少室内点浓度和显著增加在无症状的日子里,它是不够的防止吸入二手烟。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号