Respiratory Health and Lung Function in Children Exposed to the World Trade Center Disaster - 21/09/18
Abstract |
Objectives |
To compare lung function in a representative sample of World Trade Center (WTC)-exposed children with matched comparisons, and examine relationships with reported exposures.
Study design |
Study population consisted of 402 participants. Oscillometry, spirometry, and plethysmography were performed on WTC Health Registry (WTCHR) respondents who were ≤8 years of age on September 11, 2001 (n = 180) and a sociodemographically matched group of New York City residents (n = 222). We compared lung function by study arm (WTCHR and comparison group) as well as dust cloud (acute); home dust (subchronic); and other traumatic, nondust exposures.
Results |
In multivariable models, post-9/11 risk of incident asthma was higher in the WTCHR participants than in the comparison group (OR 1.109, 95% CI 1.021, 1.206; P = .015). Comparing by exposure rather than by group, dust cloud (OR 1.223, 95% CI 1.095, 1.365; P < .001) and home dust (OR 1.123, 95% CI 1.029, 1.226; P = .009) exposures were also associated with a greater risk of incidence of post-9/11 asthma. No differences were identified for lung function measures.
Conclusions |
Although we cannot exclude an alternative explanation to the null findings, these results may provide some measure of reassurance to exposed children and their families regarding long-term consequences. Further study with bronchodilation and/or methacholine challenge may be needed to identify and further evaluate effects of WTC exposure. Biomarker studies may also be more informative in delineating exposure-outcome relationships.
Trial registration |
ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02068183.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Keywords : asthma, dust cloud (acute) exposure, home dust (subchronic) exposure, traumatic nondust exposures
Abbreviations : BMI, FEV1, FOT, FVC, FDR, NHANES, NYU, PFAS, WTC, WTCHR
Plan
Supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, through cooperative agreements U01OH01394 and U01OH01714. The funding organizations had no roles in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. |
Vol 201
P. 134 - octobre 2018 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?