Jessica L Rice1, Emily Brigham2, Rebecca Dineen3, Sadiya Muqueeth4, Gena O'Keefe5, Stephanie Regenold6, Kirsten Koehler7, Ana Rule7, Meredith McCormack2, Nadia N Hansel8, Gregory B Diette9. 1. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Division of Pediatric Pulmonology, Baltimore, MD, USA. 2. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 3. Baltimore City Department of Health, Bureau of Maternal and Child Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. 4. Baltimore City Department of Health, Bureau of Maternal and Child Health, Baltimore, MD, USA; Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Baltimore City Department of Health, Bureau of Maternal and Child Health, Baltimore, MD, USA; The Annie E. Casey Foundation, Baltimore, MD, USA. 6. Baltimore City Department of Health, Bureau of Maternal and Child Health, Baltimore, MD, USA; Loyola University, Student Health and Education Services, Baltimore, MD, USA. 7. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Environmental Health and Engineering, Baltimore, MD, USA. 8. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Environmental Health and Engineering, Baltimore, MD, USA. 9. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Environmental Health and Engineering, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: gdiette@jhmi.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Secondhand smoke (SHS) and other air pollutants adversely affect the health of pregnant women and infants. A feasibility study aimed at reducing air pollution in homes of pregnant women or infants living with a smoker was completed. METHODS: In collaboration with the Baltimore City Health Department, women ≥ 18 years of age and either pregnant nonsmokers, or post-partum (any smoking status) with an infant age 0-12 months were recruited. Homes had at least one smoker. Intervention included two air purifiers and secondhand smoke education. Outcomes included feasibility, change in fine particulate matter (PM2.5), air nicotine, and salivary cotinine pre- and post-intervention. RESULTS: Fifty women were enrolled (mean age 27 years, 92% African American, 71% single, 94% Medicaid eligible, 34% reported smoking) and 86% completed the study. Of the 50 women, 32 had infants and 18 were pregnant at time of enrollment. Post- intervention, 70% of participants reported smokers were less likely to smoke indoors, and 77% had at least one air purifier turned on at the final visit. Participant satisfaction was high (91%) and 98% would recommend air purifiers. Indoor PM2.5 was significantly decreased (P < 0.001). Salivary cotinine was significantly decreased for non-smoking women (P < 0.01) but not infants, and no significant change in air nicotine occurred (P = 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: Air purifiers with SHS education is a feasible intervention in homes of women and infants. These data demonstrate reduction in indoor PM2.5 and salivary cotinine in non-smoking adults. Air purifiers are not an alternative for smoking cessation and a home/ car smoking ban. Smoking cessation should be strongly encouraged for all pregnant women, and nonsmoking mothers with infants should be counseled to completely avoid SHS exposure. This study provides support for a future intervention evaluating clinical endpoints.
OBJECTIVES: Secondhand smoke (SHS) and other air pollutants adversely affect the health of pregnant women and infants. A feasibility study aimed at reducing air pollution in homes of pregnant women or infants living with a smoker was completed. METHODS: In collaboration with the Baltimore City Health Department, women ≥ 18 years of age and either pregnant nonsmokers, or post-partum (any smoking status) with an infant age 0-12 months were recruited. Homes had at least one smoker. Intervention included two air purifiers and secondhand smoke education. Outcomes included feasibility, change in fine particulate matter (PM2.5), air nicotine, and salivarycotinine pre- and post-intervention. RESULTS: Fifty women were enrolled (mean age 27 years, 92% African American, 71% single, 94% Medicaid eligible, 34% reported smoking) and 86% completed the study. Of the 50 women, 32 had infants and 18 were pregnant at time of enrollment. Post- intervention, 70% of participants reported smokers were less likely to smoke indoors, and 77% had at least one air purifier turned on at the final visit. Participant satisfaction was high (91%) and 98% would recommend air purifiers. Indoor PM2.5 was significantly decreased (P < 0.001). Salivarycotinine was significantly decreased for non-smoking women (P < 0.01) but not infants, and no significant change in air nicotine occurred (P = 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: Air purifiers with SHS education is a feasible intervention in homes of women and infants. These data demonstrate reduction in indoor PM2.5 and salivarycotinine in non-smoking adults. Air purifiers are not an alternative for smoking cessation and a home/ car smoking ban. Smoking cessation should be strongly encouraged for all pregnant women, and nonsmoking mothers with infants should be counseled to completely avoid SHS exposure. This study provides support for a future intervention evaluating clinical endpoints.
Authors: Lisa M Nicholson; Patricia M Schwirian; Elizabeth G Klein; Theresa Skybo; Lisa Murray-Johnson; Ihuoma Eneli; Bethany Boettner; Gina M French; Judith A Groner Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2011-01-27 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Patrick N Breysse; Timothy J Buckley; D'Ann Williams; Christopher M Beck; Seong-Joon Jo; Barry Merriman; Sukon Kanchanaraksa; Lee J Swartz; Karen A Callahan; Arlene M Butz; Cynthia S Rand; Gregory B Diette; Jerry A Krishnan; Adrian M Moseley; Jean Curtin-Brosnan; Nowella B Durkin; Peyton A Eggleston Journal: Environ Res Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 6.498
Authors: Wiesław A Jedrychowski; Frederica P Perera; John D Spengler; Elzbieta Mroz; Laura Stigter; Elżbieta Flak; Renata Majewska; Maria Klimaszewska-Rembiasz; Ryszard Jacek Journal: Int J Hyg Environ Health Date: 2013-01-16 Impact factor: 5.840
Authors: Susan W Blaakman; Belinda Borrelli; Elise N Wiesenthal; Maria Fagnano; Paul J Tremblay; Timothy P Stevens; Jill S Halterman Journal: Acad Pediatr Date: 2015-07-22 Impact factor: 3.107
Authors: Gregory B Diette; Meredith C McCormack; Nadia N Hansel; Patrick N Breysse; Elizabeth C Matsui Journal: Respir Care Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 2.258
Authors: Wieslaw Jedrychowski; Ivona Bendkowska; Elzbieta Flak; Agnieszka Penar; Ryszard Jacek; Irena Kaim; John D Spengler; David Camann; Frederica P Perera Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Emily Gill; Elle Anastasiou; Albert Tovar; Donna Shelley; Ana Rule; Rui Chen; Lorna E Thorpe; Terry Gordon Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-03-23 Impact factor: 3.390