| Literature DB >> 34863252 |
Houria El Ouazzani1,2,3, Steeve Rouillon4,5,6,7, Nicolas Venisse4,6, Lynda Sifer-Rivière4,8, Antoine Dupuis4,5,6, Guillaume Cambien4,5, Sarah Ayraud-Thevenot4,5, Anne-Sophie Gourgues4, Pascale Pierre-Eugène4, Fabrice Pierre6,9, Sylvie Rabouan4,5, Virginie Migeot4,5,6, Marion Albouy-Llaty4,5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The suspected or actual effects on health of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDC) and their ubiquitous presence in everyday life justify the implementation of health promotion interventions. These interventions should ideally be applied during critical windows like pregnancy. Perinatal environmental health education interventions may help to reduce EDC exposure during pregnancy. METHODS/Entities:
Keywords: Endocrine disruptors; Environmental health; Intervention research; Maternal exposure; Pregnancy; Randomized controlled trial
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34863252 PMCID: PMC8642981 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-021-05813-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Trials ISSN: 1745-6215 Impact factor: 2.279
Inclusion and exclusion criteria for the PREVED study
| Inclusion criteria | Exclusion criteria |
|---|---|
- Pregnant women with declared pregnancy - Speaking French - Being aged 18 years or more - Living in the French department of Vienne and at less than 30 min from Poitiers - Having the intention to give birth in the maternity of the University Hospital, of the clinic “Fief de Grimoire” in Poitiers or in the Hospital of Châtellerault - Having signed a consent form | - Pregnant women expecting twins or more - Having a complicated pregnancy - Not speaking French - Being under 18 years old or under legal protection despite being 18 or more - Being deprived of liberty by judicial or administrative decision - Undergoing psychiatric treatment - Not being affiliated to a social security system - Intending to move out during the next year - Having the intention to give birth in a maternity ward other than the department of Vienne - Being unable to express consent |
Behavior change techniques (BCT) used for the intervention of PREVED study
| Grouping of BCT taxonomy | Chosen BCT in each BCT group | Example of an intervention |
|---|---|---|
| Problem solving | - To identify behaviours that are easy to implement daily to reduce exposure to endocrine disruptors chemicals (EDC) (example: replace plastic with glass) | |
| Action planning | - To integrate the purchase of primary products into your personal planning and devote time to manufacturing cosmetics at home | |
| Not applicable | - No feedback between the workshops/Only a series of workshops by participant | |
| Not applicable | - Few attendants came to the workshops | |
| Training on how to perform the behavior | - To learn to read package labels - To learn to prepare cookies and cosmetics at home | |
| Behavioral experiments | - To appreciate the changes implemented daily to reduce their exposure to EDCs thanks to the three-time questionnaire which to compare her consumption before and after | |
| Information about health consequences | - To respond to participants' questions about the known effects of EDCs exposure during pregnancy | |
| Information about social and environmental consequences | - To present the consequences of behaviours aimed at reducing EDCs exposure on the environment (example: waste reduction through homemade products) | |
| Demonstration of the behavior | - To teach how to make one’s own cosmetics | |
| Prompts/clues | - To highlight leaflets and documentation at home | |
| Behavioral practice/rehearsal | - To integrate the manufacture of cosmetics into your schedule: the recipes offered were inexpensive and easy to integrate into a routine without constraints | |
| Behavior substitution | - To avoid heating food in plastic dishes with a microwave oven | |
| Habit formation | - To encourage participants to ventilate the house for 20 minutes/day | |
| Habit reversal | - To use glass jars and boxes to store food and meal leftovers, instead of plastic packaging | |
| Generalization of target behavior | - To teach how to make one’s own cosmetics in order to be independent/repeat the manufacture at home | |
| Graded tasks | - “Change everything” is neither taught nor required to propose simple solutions to reduce exposure to EDC | |
| Credible source | - To use of current data from literature | |
| Pros and cons | - To explain that using glass packaging instead of plastic is valuable but not without some constraints (heavier, risk of breaking) | |
| Comparative imagining of future outcomes | - To project yourself at home (eliminating / reducing EDCs sources) in particular to safe your health and your children health | |
| Material reward | - To bring home the products made during the workshops (floor cleaner, cookies, ...): quick practice and experimentation directly after the workshop - To reimburse the travel costs of participants (planned but not implemented) | |
| Conserving mental resources | - To recall the pleasure of consuming healthy products - To encourage the implementation of even small changes on a daily basis: Choose not-guilty and counterproductive words | |
| Adding objects to the environment | - To bring home made products: reusable containers will remind the participants of the value of making their own products and encourage them to continue manufacturing | |
| Framing/reframing | - To rely on a presentation of a positive vision of health - Do not focus on pathologies - To encourage exchanges: sharing of experiences and knowledge is complementary to the information given by the facilitators | |
| Incompatible beliefs | - To remember that a "Natural Product" is not necessarily a "Safe Product" or a "Healthy Product" - To explain that it is not necessary to go from “all industrial” to “all homemade”: by reading the labels, it is possible to better choose products containing little or no EDCs (number of ingredients, absence of 'additives ...) | |
| Not applicable | ||
| Verbal persuasion about capability | - To reassure participants: no guilty speech - To highlight simple and accessible solutions to limit EDCs exposure: positive reinforcement | |
| Focus on past success | - To encourage the sharing of experience and information between participants (example: multiparous participants can advise new parents on "tips and tricks") | |
| Not applicable |
Detailed workshops for the intervention of PREVED study
| Workshop 1 | Workshop 2 | Workshop 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Indoor air quality | Nutrition | Personal care products | |
| 2 h | 2 h | 2 h | |
| 10 people: pregnant women ± spouse, friend, or parent | 10 people: pregnant women ± spouse, friend, or parent | 10 people: pregnant women ± spouse, friend, or parent | |
| Medical advisor for indoor environments | Dietician trained in environmental health | Cosmetologist | |
- To detect and reduce sources of domestic air pollution - To share know-how, experiences, and information on alternatives | - To identify food pollutants - To share know-how, experiences, and information on alternatives | - To identify necessary elements to make healthy choices of personal care products and clothes - To share know-how, experiences, and information on alternatives |
Fig. 1Description of the three groups of the PREVED study
Dimensions of the psychosocial questionnaire used in PREVED study
| Dimension of the psychosocial questionnaire | Origin of corresponding question or questions | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| French version of the “Self-esteem scale” [ | Score ranges from 10 to 40: the lower the score, the lower self-esteem. Items for this score are self-administered | |
| Created for the questionnaire | Score ranges from 0 to 100 on a visual analogic scale | |
| Inspired by French national investigations [ | Use of visual analogic scales | |
| Created for the questionnaire and based on the Perception of Pregnancy Risk Questionnaire [ | Use of visual analogic scales. A composite and global score of perinatal risk perception related to EDC exposure was created | |
| Created for the questionnaire | A composite score was created. A catalog of photo images illustrates sources of exposure | |
| Created for the questionnaire | Use of a visual analogic scale | |
| Based on “the healthy baby concept” [ | Use of a visual analogic scale and a catalog of photo images | |
| Created for the questionnaire | The answer to this question aims to identify the trusted person, who exerts the most influence on the pregnant woman | |
| Created for the questionnaire | This exploration is meant to establish a hierarchy, with respect to chemical risk concerns. A catalog of photo images is used | |
| Created for the questionnaire | These two parameters explore the role of information provided by the media, professional studies, and relationships (personal, friendly, professional, health professionals) | |
| Created for the questionnaire | Likert-type response |
Fig. 2Course of the PREVED study
SPIRIT flow diagram of schedule of enrolment, interventions, and assessments in PREVED study
| Enrolment | Post-allocation | Close-out | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Timepoint | |||||||
| Home visit 1 | Home visit 2 | Childbirth | Home visit 3 | ||||
| Leaflet | Workshops | ||||||
| X | |||||||
| X | |||||||
| X | |||||||
| X | |||||||
| X | X | ||||||
| X | X | ||||||
| X | X | X | |||||
| X | X | X | |||||
| X | X | X | X | ||||
| X | |||||||