BACKGROUND: Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is a recognised air pollutant. Its harmful effects have been found to be implicated in health disorders, including unfavourable pregnancy outcomes. The discrepancy between self-reported environmental tobacco smoke exposure and cotinine levels in pregnant non-smokers in France was examined. METHOD: Plasma cotinine was determined by a CPG-SM method on women who had answered a self-questionnaire describing their habits and environment during pregnancy. RESULTS: Of 698 pregnant women reported as non-smokers, 305 (43.7%) claimed not to be exposed to ETS, yet 196 of these (64.3%) had plasma cotinine levels above the limit of detection. CONCLUSION: Self-reported data on ETS exposure in pregnant women therefore underestimate actual exposure. However, cotinine assay can rectify this misclassification. An accurate identification of this risk factor will help to change attitudes towards ETS and avert its adverse effects on mother and fetus.
BACKGROUND: Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is a recognised air pollutant. Its harmful effects have been found to be implicated in health disorders, including unfavourable pregnancy outcomes. The discrepancy between self-reported environmental tobacco smoke exposure and cotinine levels in pregnant non-smokers in France was examined. METHOD: Plasma cotinine was determined by a CPG-SM method on women who had answered a self-questionnaire describing their habits and environment during pregnancy. RESULTS: Of 698 pregnant women reported as non-smokers, 305 (43.7%) claimed not to be exposed to ETS, yet 196 of these (64.3%) had plasma cotinine levels above the limit of detection. CONCLUSION: Self-reported data on ETS exposure in pregnant women therefore underestimate actual exposure. However, cotinine assay can rectify this misclassification. An accurate identification of this risk factor will help to change attitudes towards ETS and avert its adverse effects on mother and fetus.
Authors: Martin Kharrazi; Gerald N DeLorenze; Farla L Kaufman; Brenda Eskenazi; John T Bernert; Steve Graham; Michelle Pearl; James Pirkle Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: L J Peppone; K M Piazza; M C Mahoney; G R Morrow; K M Mustian; O G Palesh; A Hyland Journal: Tob Control Date: 2008-11-27 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Yu Jin Paek; Jeong Bae Kang; Seung-Kwon Myung; Do-Hoon Lee; Moon-Woo Seong; Hong Gwan Seo; Jung Jin Cho; Hong Ji Song; Kyung Hee Park; Chan Ho Kim; Jeong Ah Ko Journal: Yonsei Med J Date: 2009-06-23 Impact factor: 2.759
Authors: Lubica Argalasova; Ingrid Zitnanova; Diana Vondrova; Monika Dvorakova; Lucia Laubertova; Jana Jurkovicova; Juraj Stofko; Michael Weitzman; Iveta Waczulikova; Martin Simko Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-05-13 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Nerea Mourino; Mónica Pérez-Ríos; Maria Isolina Santiago-Pérez; Bruce Lanphear; Kimberly Yolton; Joseph M Braun Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-06-28 Impact factor: 2.692