Om P Kurmi1, Charandeep S Sadhra2, Jon G Ayres3, Steven S Sadhra3. 1. Clinical Trial Service Unit & Epidemiological Services Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 2. College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. 3. Institute of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK;
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies, particularly from low-income and middle-income countries, suggest that exposure to smoke from household air pollution (HAP) may be a risk factor for tuberculosis. The primary aim of this study was to quantify the risk of tuberculosis from HAP and explore bias and identify possible causes for heterogeneity in reported effect sizes. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted from original studies. Meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model, with results presented as a pooled effect estimate (EE) with 95% CI. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed. RESULTS: Twelve studies that considered active tuberculosis and reported adjusted effect sizes were included in the meta-analyses. The overall pooled EE (OR, 95% CI) showed a significant adverse effect (1.43, 1.07 to 1.91) and with significant heterogeneity between studies (I(2)=70.8%, p<0.001). When considering studies of cases diagnosed microbiologically, the pooled EE approached significance (1.26, 0.95 to 1.68). The pooled EE (OR, 95% CI) was significantly higher among those exposed only to biomass smoke (1.49, 1.08 to 2.05) when compared with the use of kerosene only (0.70, 0.13 to 3.87). Similarly, the pooled EE among women (1.61, 0.73 to 3.57) was greater than when both genders were combined (1.39, 1.01 to 1.92). There was no publication bias (Egger plot, p=0.136). Significant heterogeneity was observed in the diagnostic criteria for tuberculosis (coefficient=0.38, p=0.042). CONCLUSIONS: Biomass smoke is a significant risk factor for active tuberculosis. Most of the studies were small with limited information on measures of HAP. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
BACKGROUND: Studies, particularly from low-income and middle-income countries, suggest that exposure to smoke from household air pollution (HAP) may be a risk factor for tuberculosis. The primary aim of this study was to quantify the risk of tuberculosis from HAP and explore bias and identify possible causes for heterogeneity in reported effect sizes. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted from original studies. Meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model, with results presented as a pooled effect estimate (EE) with 95% CI. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed. RESULTS: Twelve studies that considered active tuberculosis and reported adjusted effect sizes were included in the meta-analyses. The overall pooled EE (OR, 95% CI) showed a significant adverse effect (1.43, 1.07 to 1.91) and with significant heterogeneity between studies (I(2)=70.8%, p<0.001). When considering studies of cases diagnosed microbiologically, the pooled EE approached significance (1.26, 0.95 to 1.68). The pooled EE (OR, 95% CI) was significantly higher among those exposed only to biomass smoke (1.49, 1.08 to 2.05) when compared with the use of kerosene only (0.70, 0.13 to 3.87). Similarly, the pooled EE among women (1.61, 0.73 to 3.57) was greater than when both genders were combined (1.39, 1.01 to 1.92). There was no publication bias (Egger plot, p=0.136). Significant heterogeneity was observed in the diagnostic criteria for tuberculosis (coefficient=0.38, p=0.042). CONCLUSIONS: Biomass smoke is a significant risk factor for active tuberculosis. Most of the studies were small with limited information on measures of HAP. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Entities:
Keywords:
AIR POLLUTION; Environmental epidemiology; TUBERCULOSIS
Authors: Michael N Bates; Karl Pope; Tula Ram Sijali; Amod K Pokhrel; Ajay Pillarisetti; Nicholas L Lam; Sharat C Verma Journal: Environ Res Date: 2018-09-27 Impact factor: 6.498
Authors: Eleanne D S Van Vliet; Patrick L Kinney; Seth Owusu-Agyei; Neil W Schluger; Kenneth A Ae-Ngibise; Robin M Whyatt; Darby W Jack; Oscar Agyei; Steven N Chillrud; Ellen Abrafi Boamah; Mohammed Mujtaba; Kwaku Poku Asante Journal: Environ Int Date: 2019-01-24 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Dennis Emuron; Trishul Siddharthan; Brooks Morgan; Suzanne L Pollard; Matthew R Grigsby; Dina Goodman; Muhammad Chowdhury; Adolfo Rubinstein; Vilma Irazola; Laura Gutierrez; J Jaime Miranda; Antonio Bernabe-Ortiz; Dewan Alam; Bruce Kirenga; Rupert Jones; Frederik van Gemert; William Checkley Journal: Lung Date: 2019-10-03 Impact factor: 2.584
Authors: Jessica L Elf; Onyinyechi Eke; Modiehi Rakgokong; Ebrahim Variava; Yudesh Baliram; Katlego Motlhaoleng; Limakatso Lebina; Adrienne E Shapiro; Patrick N Breysse; Jonathan E Golub; Neil Martinson Journal: BMC Res Notes Date: 2017-11-13
Authors: Suzanne M Simkovich; Dina Goodman; Christian Roa; Mary E Crocker; Gonzalo E Gianella; Bruce J Kirenga; Robert A Wise; William Checkley Journal: NPJ Prim Care Respir Med Date: 2019-04-26 Impact factor: 2.871
Authors: Muhammad Mansoor Asghar; Zhaohua Wang; Bo Wang; Syed Anees Haider Zaidi Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Date: 2019-12-13 Impact factor: 5.190