| Literature DB >> 27604802 |
Ruzanna Grigoryan1, Varduhi Petrosyan1, Dzovinar Melkom Melkomian2, Vahe Khachadourian3, Andrew McCartor4, Byron Crape1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children's exposure to lead poses a significant risk for neurobehavioral consequences. Existing studies documented lead contamination in residential soil in mining and smelting communities in Armenia. This study aimed to assess blood lead levels (BLL) in children living in three communities in Armenia adjacent to metal mining and smelting industries, and related risk factors.Entities:
Keywords: Blood lead level; Children; Lead contamination; Lead exposure; Metal Mining; Smelting
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27604802 PMCID: PMC5015252 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-016-3613-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Fig. 1Akhtala Community. The farther section was considered to have less exposure because apart from being located slightly farther from the toxic sources it was also located above the gorge on top of the hill as opposed to the closer section which was in the gorge
Fig. 2Alaverdi Community. The farther section was considered to have less exposure because apart from being located slightly farther from the toxic sources it was also located above the gorge on top of the hill as opposed to the closer section which was in the gorge
Fig. 3Erebuni District of Yerevan
Descriptive statistics by communities and for the total sample, 2013
| Variables | %, mean, range, SD | Alaverdi (SSa = 69) | Akhtala (SS = 37) | Yerevan (SS = 53) | Total (SS = 159) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Children involved in the study | % | 43.4 | 23.3 | 33.3 | 100.0 |
| BLL above 5 μg/dl | % | 72.5 | 83.8 | 52.8 | 68.6 |
| GM of BLL | Mean ± SD | 6.4 ± 3.1 | 6.8 ± 3.2 | 5.1 ± 2.4 | 6.0 ± 3.0 |
| Range | 3.5–24.0 | 3.6–15.5 | 1.6–11.7 | 1.6–24.0 | |
| Caregivers’ age | Mean ± SD | 31.8 ± 8.43 | 32.14 ± 7.23 | 33.06 ± 8.17 | 32.3 ± 8.1 |
| Caregiver’s education: higher versus lower | Higher % | 18.8 | 24.3 | 35.85 | 25.8 |
| Caregivers’ marital status: married versus widowed | Married % | 97.1 | 94.6 | 96.2 | 96.2 |
| Caregivers’ employment status | Employed % | 21.7 | 10.8 | 35.6 | 23.9 |
| Children’s sex | Female % | 46.4 | 48.6 | 48.1 | 47.5 |
| Child’s age in years | Mean ± SD | 5.2 ± 0.76 | 5.51 ± 0.83 | 5.35 ± 0.99 | 5.3 ± 0.9 |
| Child nutrition % score | Mean ± SD | 50.96 ± 15.64 | 49.22 ± 13.75 | 49.53 ± 15.56 | 50.0 ± 15.1 |
| Stunting in children | Yes % | 9.4 | 19.4 | 10.6 | 12.2 |
| Child plays with soil in yards, play grounds or gardens in warm seasons | Yes % | 79.1 | 75.7 | 69.2 | 75.0 |
| Hours spent in yards, playgrounds or gardens daily in warm season | Mean ± SD | 3.3 ± 2.8 | 4.1 ± 2.9 | 2.6 ± 2.8 | 3.3 ± 2.8 |
| Frequency of child washing hands after coming home: always versus not always | Always % | 89.9 | 66.7 | 90.4 | 84.7 |
| Frequency of child washing hands before eating: always versus not always | Always % | 67.6 | 56.8 | 63.5 | 63.7 |
| Child’s behavior of biting nails | Yes % | 17.4 | 21.6 | 13.5 | 17.1 |
| Child’s hygiene score | Mean ± SD | 1.74 ± 0.68 | 1.44 ± 0.84 | 1.67 ± 0.59 | 1.7 ± 0.7 |
| Household living standard % score | Mean ± SD | 35.9 ± 13.3 | 30.4 | 40.7 ± 14.3 | 36.3 ± 14.3 |
| Household size | Mean ± SD | 4.97 ± 1.14 | 5.03 ± 1.46 | 5.51 ± 1.40 | 5.2 ± 1.3 |
| Housing typeb: flat or house | Flat % | 89.9 | 70.3 | 45.3 | 70.4 |
| Housing floorb: first versus higher floor | First floor % | 34.8 | 56.8 | 58.5 | 47.8 |
| Type of windows: new versus old | New % | 13.0 | 18.9 | 41.5 | 23.9 |
| Daily mean duration of opening the windows in summer -in hours | Mean ± SD | 14.80 ± 6.11 | 17.76 ± 7.35 | 19.12 ± 7.50 | 16.9 ± 7.1 |
| Having carpet on the floor | Always % | 56.5 | 54.1 | 50.9 | 54.1 |
| Seasonal % | 34.8 | 29.7 | 34 | 33.3 | |
| Never % | 8.7 | 16.2 | 15.1 | 12.6 | |
| Duration of occupying the current flat/house in years | Mean ± SD | 8.7 ± 8.6 | 7.9 ± 7.4 | 9.5 ± 8.5 | 8.8 ± 8.3 |
| Number of current smokers in the family | Mean ± SD | 1.1 ± 0.6 | 0.9 ± 0.6 | 1.3 ± 0.8 | 1.1 ± 0.7 |
| Smoking in the presence of the child | Yes % | 55.9 | 85.7 | 76.1 | 69.2 |
| Having a family member working in a processing facility, mine or smelter compared to not having any | Yes % | 29.0 | 58.3 | 0 | 25.9 |
| Number of family members working in a processing facility, mine or smelter | Mean ± SD | 0.4 ± 0.6 | 0.6 ± 0.6 | 0 ± 0 | 0.3 ± 0.5 |
| Caregiver’s knowledge % score | Mean ± SD | 53.6 ± 17.7 | 58.8 ± 19.1 | 42.2 ± 18.1 | 52.3 ± 18.6 |
| Frequency of parents changing clothes/shoes before coming from processing facility, mine or smelter | Always % | 85.0 | 71.4 | 100 | 78.0 |
| Not always % | 15.0 | 28.6 | 0 | 22.0 | |
| Household hygiene % score | Mean ± SD | 67.4 ± 13.1 | 68.4 ± 13.7 | 74.6 ± 12.9 | 70.4 ± 13.5 |
| Frequency of furniture dustingc: daily versus less than daily | Daily % | 92.6 | 83.8 | 98.1 | 92.4 |
| Housing distance from the toxic source(s) | Closer % | 59.4 | 56.8 | 64.2 | 60.4 |
| Farther % | 40.6 | 43.2 | 35.8 | 39.6 | |
| Midpoint distance from the toxic source | Closer | 640 | 846 | 3 516 | |
| (meters) | Farther | 1 318d | 849d | 5 493 |
a Sample size
b House is defined as a stand-alone building that consists of one or two floors. A total of 12 out of 47 houses had two floors. Flats are apartments in multi-floor buildings. When calculating the variable of living on the first floor or higher floors the houses with second floor were included in the category of first floor
c When the individual questions of the Household protective hygiene % score were analyzed only the variable of dusting furniture was statistically significantly associated with BLL. Therefore, it is presented in descriptive statistics and regression analysis
d This section was considered to have less exposure because apart from being located slightly farther from the toxic sources it was also located above the gorge on top of the hill as opposed to the closer section which was in the gorge
Final multivariable linear regression models for the total sample, for the sample from Yerevan and for the combined sample from Akhtala and Alaverdi
| Variables | Adjusted ratio of expected GM of BLL (95 % CI) |
|
|---|---|---|
| Total sample | ||
| Combined Akhtala and Alaverdi compared to Yerevan | 1.24 (1.09, 1.42) | 0.001* |
| Caregiver’s lower education compared to higher | 1.23 (1.07, 1.41) | 0.004* |
| Dusting furniture less often than daily compared to daily | 1.29 (0.98, 1.55) | 0.075** |
| Closer housing distance from toxic source(s) compared to farther | 1.22 (1.08,1.38) | 0.002* |
| Akhtala and Alaverdi combined | ||
| Caregiver’s lower education compared to higher | 1.20 (1.01, 1.43) | 0.035* |
| Dusting furniture less often than daily compared to daily | 1.30 (1.04, 1.64) | 0.024* |
| Yerevan | ||
| Caregiver’s lower education compared to higher | 1.28 (1.02, 1.59) | 0.030* |
| For housing located farther from toxic source(s)*** | ||
| Old windows compared to new ones | 2.01 (1.42, 2.86) | 0.000* |
| For housing located closer to the toxic source(s) | ||
| Old windows compared to new ones | 1.06 (0.82, 1.37) | 0.628 |
* Statistical significance (p ≤ 0.05)
** Marginally statistical significance (0.05 > p ≤ 0.1)
*** Interaction term between housing distance from toxic source(s) and type of window was statistically significant (p < 0.004)