| Literature DB >> 29376138 |
Sabrina Naz1, Andrew Page1, Kingsley Emwinyore Agho2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Solid fuel use is the major source of household air pollution (HAP) and accounts for a substantial burden of morbidity and mortality in low and middle income countries. To evaluate and compare childhood mortality attributable to HAP in four South Asian countries.Entities:
Keywords: Cooking fuel; Household air pollution; Population attributable risk; South Asia; Under-five mortality
Year: 2018 PMID: 29376138 PMCID: PMC5772697 DOI: 10.1186/s41256-018-0059-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Glob Health Res Policy ISSN: 2397-0642
Relative risk, exposure prevalence for PAF, PIF and cases of neonatal and under-five mortality due to HAP in the four South Asian countries
| Country | Exposurea | Exposure (%) in cases (n/Total cases)b | Exposure (%) in controls (n/Total controls)c | Relative risk (95% CI)d | Exposure Prevalence (95% CI)e | Estimated Prevalence (scenario 1) (95% CI)f | Estimated Prevalence (scenario 2) (95% CI)g | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Neonatal mortality | Bangladesh | No HAP from cooking fuel | 63/772 | 2773/25304 | 1.00 | 11.0 (10.6–11.4) | 30.6 (30.0–31.1) | 67.1 (66.5–67.6) |
| HAP from cooking fuel | 709/772 | 22,531/25304 | 1.29 (0.94–1.78) | 89.0 (88.7–89.4) | 69.5 (68.9–70.0) | 33.0 (32.4–33.5) | ||
| India | No HAP from cooking fuel | 565/6082 | 26,783/160300 | 1.00 | 16.7 (16.5–16.9) | 35.0 (34.8–35.3) | 69.2 (69.0–69.4) | |
| HAP from cooking fuel | 5517/6082 | 133,517/160300 | 1.23 (1.09–1.39) | 83.3 (83.1–83.5) | 65.0 (64.7–65.2) | 30.8 (30.6–31.0) | ||
| Nepal | No HAP from cooking fuel | 15/572 | 1303/17208 | 1.00 | 7.6 (7.2–8.0) | 27.9 (27.2–28.6) | 65.8 (65.1–66.5) | |
| HAP from cooking fuel | 557/572 | 15,905/17208 | 2.67 (1.47–4.82) | 92.4 (92.0–92.8) | 71.1 (71.4–72.8) | 34.2 (33.5–43.9) | ||
| Pakistan | No HAP from cooking fuel | 136/503 | 3909/11004 | 1.00 | 35.5 (34.6–36.4) | 49.7 (48.8–50.7) | 76.1 (75.3–76.9) | |
| HAP from cooking fuel | 367/503 | 7095/11004 | 1.08 (0.77–1.54) | 64.5 (63.6–65.4) | 50.3 (49.4–51.2) | 23.9 (23.1–24.7) | ||
| Totalh | 7929 | 213,816 | 1.32 (1.05–1.67) | 83.8 (75.2–90.9) | ||||
| Under-five mortality | Bangladesh | No HAP from cooking fuel | 107/1211 | 2729/24865 | 1.00 | 11.0 (10.6–11.4) | 30.6 (30.0–31.1) | 67.1 (66.5–67.7) |
| HAP from cooking fuel | 1104/1211 | 22,136/24865 | 1.06 (0.82–1.37) | 89.0 (88.6–89.4) | 69.4 (68.9–70.0) | 32.9 (32.4–33.5) | ||
| India | No HAP from cooking fuel | 850/11311 | 26,498/155071 | 1.00 | 17.1 (16.9–17.3) | 35.3 (35.1–35.6) | 69.3 (69.1–69.6) | |
| HAP from cooking fuel | 10,461/11311 | 128,573/155071 | 1.30 (1.18–1.43) | 82.9 (82.7–83.1) | 64.7 (64.4–64.9) | 30.7 (30.5–30.9) | ||
| Nepal | No HAP from cooking fuel | 25/1014 | 1293/16766 | 1.00 | 7.7 (7.3–8.1) | 28.0 (27.3–28.7) | 65.9 (65.1–66.6) | |
| HAP from cooking fuel | 989/1014 | 15,473/16766 | 2.19 (1.37–3.51) | 92.3 (91.9–92.7) | 72.0 (71.3–72.7) | 34.2 (33.4–34.9) | ||
| Pakistan | No HAP from cooking fuel | 197/768 | 3848/10739 | 1.00 | 35.8 (34.9–36.8) | 50.0 (49.0–50.9) | 76.3 (75.4–77.1) | |
| HAP from cooking fuel | 571/768 | 6891/10739 | 1.22 (0.92–1.64) | 64.2 (63.3–65.1) | 50.1 (49.1–51.0) | 23.7 (22.9–24.6) | ||
| Totalh | 13,290 | 207,441 | 1.30 (1.07–1.57) | 83.6 (74.9–90.8) |
aExposure were categorised as, “no HAP from cooking fuel” (use of clean fuels such as electricity, LPG, natural gas, biogas) and “HAP from cooking fuel” (use of polluting fuels such as kerosene, coal/lignite, charcoal, wood, straw/shrubs/grass, agricultural crop and animal dung), bnumber of ‘cases’ exposed/unexposed in each category, cnumber of ‘controls’ exposed/unexposed in each category, dRelative risk adjusted for selected potential confounders, PAF Population attributable fraction, PIF Potential impact fraction, eexposure prevalence for PAF calculation, fexposure prevalence for PIF calculation based on scenario1: assuming 22% reduction on HAP following previous intervention [27], gexposure prevalence for PIF calculation based on scenario2: assuming 63% reduction on HAP following previous community-based intervention [28]. hTotal number of cases and controls were summed across country-specific DHS data sets, and Relative Risk and exposure prevalence were summarised across countries using random effects meta-analysis using the inverse variance method (DerSimonian-Laird)
PAF and PIF estimates for neonatal and under-five mortality associated with HAP in the four South Asian countries
| Country | Casesa | PAF% (95% CI)b | PIF% (95% CI) (scenario 1 [27])c | PIF% (95% CI) (scenario 2 [28])d | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Neonatal mortality | Bangladesh | 772 | 18.5 (−8.1–40.2) | 4.1 (−1.7–8.9) | 11.6 (−4.9–25.5) |
| India | 6082 | 15.8 (6.8–24.2) | 3.5 (1.4–5.9) | 10.0 (4.3–15.4) | |
| Nepal | 572 | 56.8 (25.7–77.7) | 12.5 (5.4–17.1) | 32.3 (10.3–47.0) | |
| Pakistan | 503 | 3.5 (−19.2–25.0) | 0.8 (−4.6–5.9) | 2.3 (−12.5–15.7) | |
| Joint PAF/PIF | – | 71.4 (46.0–86.9) | 19.6 (10.4–27.2) | 47.4 (25.3–63.1) | |
| Total | 7929 | – | – | – | |
| Under-five mortality | Bangladesh | 1211 | 3.9 (−20.8–24.9) | 2.1 (−3.6–6.9) | 6.0 (−9.6–19.5) |
| India | 11,311 | 19.8 (12.9–26.3) | 4.3 (2.8–5.8) | 12.5 (8.3–16.6) | |
| Nepal | 1014 | 49.8 (23.5–69.5) | 10.9 (4.7–15.4) | 27.6 (8.6–41.6) | |
| Pakistan | 768 | 11.4 (−6.9–29.0) | 1.3 (−2.9–5.2) | 3.7 (−7.0–13.8) | |
| Joint PAF/PIF | – | 65.7 (43.1–81.5) | 17.6 (9.6–24.6) | 42.7 (22.8–57.6) | |
| Total | 13,290 | – | – | – |
aTotal number of neonatal and under-five mortality cases associated with use of cooking fuel, bPopulation attributable faction (PAF) estimates attributable to HAP, cPotential impact faction (PIF) estimates based on 22% reduction on HAP, dPotential impact faction (PIF) estimates based on 63% reduction on HAP