Suzanne C Hughes1, John Bellettiere2, Benjamin Nguyen2, Sandy Liles2, Neil E Klepeis2, Penelope J E Quintana3, Vincent Berardi4, Saori Obayashi2, Savannah Bradley5, C Richard Hofstetter2, Melbourne F Hovell2. 1. Center for Behavioral Epidemiology and Community Health (C-BEACH), Graduate School of Public Health, San Diego State University, San Diego, California. Electronic address: shughes@cbeachsdsu.org. 2. Center for Behavioral Epidemiology and Community Health (C-BEACH), Graduate School of Public Health, San Diego State University, San Diego, California. 3. Graduate School of Public Health, San Diego State University, San Diego, California. 4. Department of Psychology, Chapman University, Orange, California. 5. College of Public Health and Human Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Exposure to fine particulate matter in the home from sources such as smoking, cooking, and cleaning may put residents, especially children, at risk for detrimental health effects. A randomized clinical trial was conducted from 2011 to 2016 to determine whether real-time feedback in the home plus brief coaching of parents or guardians could reduce fine particle levels in homes with smokers and children. DESIGN: A randomized trial with two groups-intervention and control. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 298 participants from predominantly low-income households with an adult smoker and a child aged <14 years. Participants were recruited during 2012-2015 from multiple sources in San Diego, mainly Women, Infants and Children Program sites. INTERVENTION: The multicomponent intervention consisted of continuous lights and brief sound alerts based on fine particle levels in real time and four brief coaching sessions using particle level graphs and motivational interviewing techniques. Motivational interviewing coaching focused on particle reduction to protect children and other occupants from elevated particle levels, especially from tobacco-related sources. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In-home air particle levels were measured by laser particle counters continuously in both study groups. The two outcomes were daily mean particle counts and percentage time with high particle concentrations (>15,000 particles/0.01 ft3). Linear mixed models were used to analyze the differential change in the outcomes over time by group, during 2016-2017. RESULTS: Intervention homes had significantly larger reductions than controls in daily geometric mean particle concentrations (18.8% reduction vs 6.5% reduction, p<0.001). Intervention homes' average percentage time with high particle concentrations decreased 45.1% compared with a 4.2% increase among controls (difference between groups p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Real-time feedback for air particle levels and brief coaching can reduce fine particle levels in homes with smokers and young children. Results set the stage for refining feedback and possible reinforcing consequences for not generating smoke-related particles. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01634334.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: Exposure to fine particulate matter in the home from sources such as smoking, cooking, and cleaning may put residents, especially children, at risk for detrimental health effects. A randomized clinical trial was conducted from 2011 to 2016 to determine whether real-time feedback in the home plus brief coaching of parents or guardians could reduce fine particle levels in homes with smokers and children. DESIGN: A randomized trial with two groups-intervention and control. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 298 participants from predominantly low-income households with an adult smoker and a child aged <14 years. Participants were recruited during 2012-2015 from multiple sources in San Diego, mainly Women, Infants and Children Program sites. INTERVENTION: The multicomponent intervention consisted of continuous lights and brief sound alerts based on fine particle levels in real time and four brief coaching sessions using particle level graphs and motivational interviewing techniques. Motivational interviewing coaching focused on particle reduction to protect children and other occupants from elevated particle levels, especially from tobacco-related sources. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In-home air particle levels were measured by laser particle counters continuously in both study groups. The two outcomes were daily mean particle counts and percentage time with high particle concentrations (>15,000 particles/0.01 ft3). Linear mixed models were used to analyze the differential change in the outcomes over time by group, during 2016-2017. RESULTS: Intervention homes had significantly larger reductions than controls in daily geometric mean particle concentrations (18.8% reduction vs 6.5% reduction, p<0.001). Intervention homes' average percentage time with high particle concentrations decreased 45.1% compared with a 4.2% increase among controls (difference between groups p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Real-time feedback for air particle levels and brief coaching can reduce fine particle levels in homes with smokers and young children. Results set the stage for refining feedback and possible reinforcing consequences for not generating smoke-related particles. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01634334.
Authors: John Bellettiere; Suzanne C Hughes; Sandy Liles; Marie Boman-Davis; Neil Klepeis; Elaine Blumberg; Jeff Mills; Vincent Berardi; Saori Obayashi; T Tracy Allen; Melbourne F Hovell Journal: Am J Public Health Res Date: 2014
Authors: Arlene M Butz; Patrick Breysse; Cynthia Rand; Jean Curtin-Brosnan; Peyton Eggleston; Gregory B Diette; D'Ann Williams; John T Bernert; Elizabeth C Matsui Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2011-05
Authors: Meredith C McCormack; Patrick N Breysse; Nadia N Hansel; Elizabeth C Matsui; Emily S Tonorezos; Jean Curtin-Brosnan; D'Ann L Williams; Timothy J Buckley; Peyton A Eggleston; Gregory B Diette Journal: Environ Res Date: 2007-10-24 Impact factor: 6.498
Authors: Laura Rosen; David Zucker; Melbourne Hovell; Nili Brown; Amit Ram; Vicki Myers Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2015-11-30 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Marc A Adams; James F Sallis; Gregory J Norman; Melbourne F Hovell; Eric B Hekler; Elyse Perata Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-12-09 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Melbourne F Hovell; John Bellettiere; Sandy Liles; Benjamin Nguyen; Vincent Berardi; Christine Johnson; Georg E Matt; John Malone; Marie C Boman-Davis; Penelope J E Quintana; Saori Obayashi; Dale Chatfield; Robert Robinson; Elaine J Blumberg; Weg M Ongkeko; Neil E Klepeis; Suzanne C Hughes Journal: Tob Control Date: 2019-02-15 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Vincent Berardi; Georgiana Bostean; Lydia Q Ong; Britney S Wong; Bradley N Collins; Melbourne F Hovell Journal: J Immigr Minor Health Date: 2021-11-27
Authors: Elizabeth K Do; Kennedy C Bradley; Kendall Fugate-Laus; Kiranpreet Kaur; Matthew S Halquist; Laure Ray; Michell A Pope; Rashelle B Hayes; David C Wheeler; Bernard F Fuemmeler Journal: Tob Prev Cessat Date: 2021-03-12
Authors: Vincent Berardi; Bradley N Collins; Laura M Glynn; Stephen J Lepore; E Melinda Mahabee-Gittens; Karen M Wilson; Melbourne F Hovell Journal: Tob Prev Cessat Date: 2022-06-22