首页> 外文OA文献 >Effectiveness of household lockable pesticide storage to reduce pesticide self-poisoning in rural Asia:a community-based, cluster-randomised controlled trial
【2h】

Effectiveness of household lockable pesticide storage to reduce pesticide self-poisoning in rural Asia:a community-based, cluster-randomised controlled trial

机译:家庭可锁定农药存储在减少亚洲农村地区农药自我中毒方面的有效性:一项基于社区,集群随机对照的试验

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Background: Agricultural pesticide self-poisoning is a major public health problem in rural Asia. The use of ‘safer’ household pesticide storage has been promoted to prevent deaths but there is no evidence of effectiveness. We aimed to test the effectiveness of lockable household containers on preventing pesticide self-poisoning.Methods: We performed a community-based cluster randomised controlled trial in Sri Lanka with 180 rural villages allocated to intervention (n=90) or usual practice control (n=90). Intervention arm households using pesticides were given a lockable storage container. Further interaction was restricted to community posters and six-monthly reminders during routine community meetings. Primary outcome was the incidence of pesticide self-poisoning in people aged 14-years and over during a three-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of pesticide poisoning, all self-harm (fatal and non-fatal), all self-poisoning, and paediatric pesticide poisoning.Findings: We enrolled 223,861 people in 53,382 households; 20,200 household pesticide storage containers were distributed. After three-years, surveys of 13,999 (26.2%) households indicated that 53.3% and 5.0% of intervention and control households, respectively, were locking pesticides away at least some of the time. The intervention had no significant effect on pesticide self-poisoning: intervention 293.3 vs. control 318.0 per 100,000 years of follow-up (RR 0.93 [95%CI 0.80-1.08], p=0.33). There was no evidence that the intervention was more effective during the first year, when appropriate usage was maximal. We found no evidence of switching from pesticide self-poisoning to other forms of self-harm, with no significant difference in fatal (intervention 82 vs control 67, RR 1.22 [0.88-1.68]) or non-fatal (1135 vs 1153, RR 0.97 [0.86-1.08]) self-harm events involving all methods.Interpretation: We found no evidence that means reduction through improved household pesticide storage reduces pesticide-self-poisoning. Other approaches, particularly removal of highly hazardous pesticides from agricultural practice, are likely to be more effective for suicide prevention in rural Asia.
机译:背景:农药中毒是亚洲农村地区的主要公共卫生问题。提倡使用“更安全”的家用农药储存库来防止死亡,但没有有效的证据。方法:我们在斯里兰卡进行了一项基于社区的整群随机对照试验,其中180个农村村被分配为干预(n = 90)或常规控制(n = 90)。使用农药的干预小农户得到了一个可上锁的储存容器。在常规的社区会议期间,进一步的互动仅限于社区海报和六个月的提醒。主要结果是在三年的随访中,14岁及以上人群的农药中毒发生率。次要结果包括农药中毒的发生率,所有自我伤害(致命和非致命性),所有自我中毒和儿科农药中毒。结果:我们在53382户家庭中招募了223861人;分发了20200个家用农药储存容器。三年后,对13,999个家庭(26.2%)的调查表明,至少在某些时候,分别有53.3%和5.0%的干预家庭和对照家庭封锁了农药。干预措施对农药中毒没有显着影响:干预措施每10万年随访293.3 vs对照318.0(RR 0.93 [95%CI 0.80-1.08],p = 0.33)。没有证据表明在适当使用量最大的情况下,第一年的干预效果更好。我们没有发现从农药中毒转变为其他形式的自残的证据,在致命(干预措施82与对照组67,RR 1.22 [0.88-1.68])或非致命(1135对1153 vs 1153)方面,均无明显差异。 0.97 [0.86-1.08])涉及所有方法的自残事件。解释:我们没有发现证据表明通过改善家用杀虫剂储存来减少杀虫剂自毒。其他方法,特别是从农业实践中去除高危农药的方法,可能在亚洲农村地区更有效地预防自杀。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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