Megan L Benka-Coker1, Bonnie N Young2, Joshua P Keller3, Ethan S Walker4, Sarah Rajkumar2, John Volckens5, Nicholas Good2, Casey Quinn2, Christian L'Orange6, Zachary D Weller3, Sebastian Africano7, Anibal B Osorto Pinel8, Jennifer L Peel2, Maggie L Clark9. 1. Department of Health Sciences, Gettysburg College, Gettysburg, PA, USA. 2. Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA. 3. Department of Statistics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA. 4. Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA; School of Public and Community Health Sciences, University of Montana, Missoula, MT, USA. 5. Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA; Department of Mechanical Engineering, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA. 6. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA. 7. Trees, Water & People, Fort Collins, CO, USA. 8. Trees, Water & People, Fort Collins, CO, USA; Asociación Hondureña para el Desarrollo, Tegucigalpa, Honduras. 9. Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA. Electronic address: Maggie.Clark@colostate.edu.
Abstract
TRIAL DESIGN: We evaluated the impact of a biomass stove intervention on fine particulate matter (PM2.5) concentrations using an individual-level, stepped-wedge randomized trial. METHODS: We enrolled 230 women in rural Honduran households using traditional biomass stoves and randomly allocated them to one of two study arms. The Justa stove, the study intervention, was locally-sourced, wood-burning, and included an engineered combustion chamber and chimney. At each of 6 visits over 3 years, we measured 24-hour gravimetric personal and kitchen PM2.5 concentrations. Half of the households received the intervention after Visit 2 and half after Visit 4. We conducted intent-to-treat analyses to evaluate the intervention effect using linear mixed models with log-transformed kitchen or personal PM2.5 (separately) as the dependent variable, adjusting for time. We also compared PM2.5 concentrations to World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. RESULTS: Arms 1 and 2 each had 115 participants with 664 and 632 completed visits, respectively. Median 24-hour average personal PM2.5 exposures were 81 μg/m3 (25th-75th percentile: 50-141 μg/m3) for the traditional stove condition (n=622) and 43 μg/m3 (25th-75th percentile: 27-73 μg/m3) for the Justa stove condition (n=585). Median 24-hour average kitchen concentrations were 178 μg/m3 (25th-75th percentile: 69-440 μg/m3; n=629) and 53 μg/m3 (25th-75th percentile: 29-103 μg/m3; n=578) for the traditional and Justa stove conditions, respectively. The Justa intervention resulted in a 32% reduction in geometric mean personal PM2.5 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 20-43%) and a 56% reduction (95% CI: 46-65%) in geometric mean kitchen PM2.5. During rainy and dry seasons, 53% and 41% of participants with the Justa intervention had 24-hour average personal PM2.5 exposures below the WHO interim target-3 guideline (37.5 μg/m3), respectively. CONCLUSION: The Justa stove intervention substantially lowered personal and kitchen PM2.5 and may be a provisional solution that is feasible for Latin American communities where cleaner fuels may not be available, affordable, or acceptable for some time. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02658383.
TRIAL DESIGN: We evaluated the impact of a biomass stove intervention on fine particulate matter (PM2.5) concentrations using an individual-level, stepped-wedge randomized trial. METHODS: We enrolled 230 women in rural Honduran households using traditional biomass stoves and randomly allocated them to one of two study arms. The Justa stove, the study intervention, was locally-sourced, wood-burning, and included an engineered combustion chamber and chimney. At each of 6 visits over 3 years, we measured 24-hour gravimetric personal and kitchen PM2.5 concentrations. Half of the households received the intervention after Visit 2 and half after Visit 4. We conducted intent-to-treat analyses to evaluate the intervention effect using linear mixed models with log-transformed kitchen or personal PM2.5 (separately) as the dependent variable, adjusting for time. We also compared PM2.5 concentrations to World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. RESULTS: Arms 1 and 2 each had 115 participants with 664 and 632 completed visits, respectively. Median 24-hour average personal PM2.5 exposures were 81 μg/m3 (25th-75th percentile: 50-141 μg/m3) for the traditional stove condition (n=622) and 43 μg/m3 (25th-75th percentile: 27-73 μg/m3) for the Justa stove condition (n=585). Median 24-hour average kitchen concentrations were 178 μg/m3 (25th-75th percentile: 69-440 μg/m3; n=629) and 53 μg/m3 (25th-75th percentile: 29-103 μg/m3; n=578) for the traditional and Justa stove conditions, respectively. The Justa intervention resulted in a 32% reduction in geometric mean personal PM2.5 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 20-43%) and a 56% reduction (95% CI: 46-65%) in geometric mean kitchen PM2.5. During rainy and dry seasons, 53% and 41% of participants with the Justa intervention had 24-hour average personal PM2.5 exposures below the WHO interim target-3 guideline (37.5 μg/m3), respectively. CONCLUSION: The Justa stove intervention substantially lowered personal and kitchen PM2.5 and may be a provisional solution that is feasible for Latin American communities where cleaner fuels may not be available, affordable, or acceptable for some time. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02658383.
Authors: Reginald Quansah; Sean Semple; Caroline A Ochieng; Sanjar Juvekar; Frederick Ato Armah; Isaac Luginaah; Jacques Emina Journal: Environ Int Date: 2017-03-22 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Kyle Steenland; Ajay Pillarisetti; Miles Kirby; Jennifer Peel; Maggie Clark; Will Checkley; Howard H Chang; Thomas Clasen Journal: Environ Int Date: 2017-11-26 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Ajay Pillarisetti; Ellison Carter; Sarah Rajkumar; Bonnie N Young; Megan L Benka-Coker; Jennifer L Peel; Michael Johnson; Maggie L Clark Journal: Environ Int Date: 2018-11-26 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Ricardo Piedrahita; Ernest Kanyomse; Evan Coffey; Mingjie Xie; Yolanda Hagar; Rex Alirigia; Felix Agyei; Christine Wiedinmyer; Katherine L Dickinson; Abraham Oduro; Michael Hannigan Journal: Sci Total Environ Date: 2016-10-24 Impact factor: 7.963
Authors: Sophie Bonjour; Heather Adair-Rohani; Jennyfer Wolf; Nigel G Bruce; Sumi Mehta; Annette Prüss-Ustün; Maureen Lahiff; Eva A Rehfuess; Vinod Mishra; Kirk R Smith Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2013-05-03 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Jiawen Liao; Miles A Kirby; Ajay Pillarisetti; Ricardo Piedrahita; Kalpana Balakrishnan; Sankar Sambandam; Krishnendu Mukhopadhyay; Wenlu Ye; Ghislaine Rosa; Fiona Majorin; Ephrem Dusabimana; Florien Ndagijimana; John P McCracken; Erick Mollinedo; Oscar de Leon; Anaité Díaz-Artiga; Lisa M Thompson; Katherine A Kearns; Luke Naeher; Joshua Rosenthal; Maggie L Clark; Kyle Steenland; Lance A Waller; William Checkley; Jennifer L Peel; Thomas Clasen; Michael Johnson Journal: Environ Pollut Date: 2021-09-21 Impact factor: 8.071