Grantee Research Project Results
Chimney stove intervention to reduce long-term wood smoke exposure lowers blood pressure among Guatemalan women.
Citation:
McCracken JP, Smith KR, Diaz A, Mittleman MA, Schwartz J. Chimney stove intervention to reduce long-term wood smoke exposure lowers blood pressure among Guatemalan women. Environmental Health Perspectives 2007;115(7):996-1001.
Abstract:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: RESPIRE, a randomized trial of an improved cookstove, was conducted in Guatemala to assess health effects of long-term reductions in wood smoke exposure. Given the evidence that ambient particles increase blood pressure, we hypothesized that the intervention would lower blood pressure. METHODS: TWO STUDY DESIGNS WERE USED: a) between-group comparisons based on randomized stove assignment, and b) before-and-after comparisons within subjects before and after they received improved stoves. From 2003 to 2005, we measured personal fine particle (particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter < 2.5 µm; PM2.5) exposures and systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) among women > 38 years of age from the chimney woodstove intervention group (49 subjects) and traditional open wood fire control group (71 subjects). Measures were repeated up to three occasions. RESULTS: Daily average PM2.5 exposures were 264 and 102 µg/m3 in the control and intervention groups, respectively. After adjusting for age, body mass index, an asset index, smoking, secondhand tobacco smoke, apparent temperature, season, day of week, time of day, and a random subject intercept, the improved stove intervention was associated with 3.7 mm Hg lower SBP [95% confidence interval (CI), -8.1 to 0.6] and 3.0 mm Hg lower DBP (95% CI, -5.7 to -0.4) compared with controls. In the second study design, among 55 control subjects measured both before and after receiving chimney stoves, similar associations were observed. CONCLUSION: The between-group comparisons provide evidence, particularly for DBP, that the chimney stove reduces blood pressure, and the before-and-after comparisons are consistent with this evidence.The perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.