Dataset Information

The MEDEA childhood asthma study design for mitigation of desert dust health effects: implementation of novel methods for assessment of air pollution exposure and lessons learned.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Desert dust events in Mediterranean countries, originating mostly from the Sahara and Arabian deserts, have been linked to climate change and are associated with significant increase in mortality and hospital admissions from respiratory causes. The MEDEA clinical intervention study in children with asthma is funded by EU LIFE+ program to evaluate the efficacy of recommendations aiming to reduce exposure to desert dust and related health effects.

Methods

This paper describes the design, methods, and challenges of the MEDEA childhood asthma study, which is performed in two highly exposed regions of the Eastern Mediterranean: Cyprus and Greece-Crete. Eligible children are recruited using screening surveys performed at primary schools and are randomized to three parallel intervention groups: a) no intervention for desert dust events, b) interventions for outdoor exposure reduction, and c) interventions for both outdoor and indoor exposure reduction. At baseline visits, participants are enrolled on MEDena® Health-Hub, which communicates, alerts and provides exposure reduction recommendations in anticipation of desert dust events. MEDEA employs novel environmental epidemiology and telemedicine methods including wearable GPS, actigraphy, health parameters sensors as well as indoor and outdoor air pollution samplers to assess study participants' compliance to recommendations, air pollutant exposures in homes and schools, and disease related clinical outcomes.

Discussion

The MEDEA study evaluates, for the first time, interventions aiming to reduce desert dust exposure and implement novel telemedicine methods in assessing clinical outcomes and personal compliance to recommendations. In Cyprus and Crete, during the first study period (February-May 2019), a total of 91 children participated in the trial while for the second study period (February-May 2020), another 120 children completed data collection. Recruitment for the third study period (February-May 2021) is underway. In this paper, we also present the unique challenges faced during the implementation of novel methodologies to reduce air pollution exposure in children. Engagement of families of asthmatic children, schools and local communities, is critical. Successful study completion will provide the knowledge for informed decision-making both at national and international level for mitigating the health effects of desert dust events in South-Eastern Europe.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03503812 , April 20, 2018.

SUBMITTER: Kouis P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7786906 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The MEDEA childhood asthma study design for mitigation of desert dust health effects: implementation of novel methods for assessment of air pollution exposure and lessons learned.

Kouis Panayiotis P Papatheodorou Stefania I SI Kakkoura Maria G MG Middleton Nicos N Galanakis Emmanuel E Michaelidi Eleni E Achilleos Souzana S Mihalopoulos Nikolaos N Neophytou Marina M Stamatelatos Gerasimos G Kaniklides Christos C Revvas Efstathios E Tymvios Filippos F Savvides Chrysanthos C Koutrakis Petros P Yiallouros Panayiotis K PK

BMC pediatrics 20210106 1

<h4>Background</h4>Desert dust events in Mediterranean countries, originating mostly from the Sahara and Arabian deserts, have been linked to climate change and are associated with significant increase in mortality and hospital admissions from respiratory causes. The MEDEA clinical intervention study in children with asthma is funded by EU LIFE+ program to evaluate the efficacy of recommendations aiming to reduce exposure to desert dust and related health effects.<h4>Methods</h4>This paper descr ...[more]

PMID: 33407248

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is a long tradition in environmental health of using frameworks for evidence synthesis, such as those of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for its Integrated Science Assessments and the International Agency for Research on Cancer Monographs. The framework, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE), was developed for evidence synthesis in clinical medicine. The U.S. Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT) elaborated an approach for evidence synthesis in environmental health building on GRADE.MethodsWe applied a modified OHAT approach and a broader "narrative" assessment to assess the level of confidence in a large systematic review on traffic-related air pollution and health outcomes.DiscussionWe discuss several challenges with the OHAT approach and its implementation and suggest improvements for synthesizing evidence from observational studies in environmental health. We consider the determination of confidence using a formal rating scheme of up- and downgrading of certain factors, the treatment of every factor as equally important, and the lower initial confidence rating of observational studies to be fundamental issues in the OHAT approach. We argue that some observational studies can offer high-confidence evidence in environmental health. We note that heterogeneity in magnitude of effect estimates should generally not weaken the confidence in the evidence, and consistency of associations across study designs, populations, and exposure assessment methods may strengthen confidence in the evidence. We mention that publication bias should be explored beyond statistical methods and is likely limited when large and collaborative studies comprise most of the evidence and when accrued over several decades. We propose to identify possible key biases, their most likely direction, and their potential impacts on the results. We think that the OHAT approach and other GRADE-type frameworks require substantial modification to align better with features of environmental health questions and the studies that address them. We emphasize that a broader, "narrative" evidence assessment based on the systematic review may complement a formal GRADE-type evaluation. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP11532.

Project description:BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: There is evidence that exposure to air pollution affects asthma, but the effect of air pollution on asthma severity has not been addressed. The aim was to assess the relation between asthma severity during the past 12 months and home outdoor concentrations of air pollution. METHODS: Asthma severity over the past 12 months was assessed in two complementary ways among 328 adult asthmatics from the French Epidemiological study on the Genetics and Environment of Asthma (EGEA) examined between 1991 and 1995. The four-class severity score integrated clinical events and type of treatment. The five-level asthma score is based only on the occurrence of symptoms. Nitrogen dioxide (NO(2)), sulphur dioxide (SO(2)) and ozone (O(3)) concentrations were assigned to each residence using two different methods. The first was based on the closest monitor data from 1991 to 1995. The second consisted of spatial models that used geostatistical interpolations and then assigned air pollutants to the geo-coded residences (1998). RESULTS: Higher asthma severity score was significantly related to the 8-hour average of ozone during April-September (O(3)-8 h) and the number of days (O(3)-days) with 8-hour ozone averages above 110 microg.m(-3) (for a 36-day increase, equivalent to the interquartile range, in O(3)-days, odds ratio 2.22 (95% confidence interval 1.61 to 3.07) for one class difference in score). Adjustment for age, sex, smoking habits, occupational exposure, and educational level did not alter results. Asthma severity was unrelated to NO(2). Both exposure assessment methods and severity scores resulted in very similar findings. SO(2) correlated with severity but reached statistical significance only for the model-based assignment of exposure. CONCLUSIONS: The observed associations between asthma severity and air pollution, in particular O(3), support the hypothesis that air pollution at levels far below current standards increases asthma severity.

Dataset Information

The MEDEA childhood asthma study design for mitigation of desert dust health effects: implementation of novel methods for assessment of air pollution exposure and lessons learned.

Background

Methods

Discussion

Trial registration

Publications

The MEDEA childhood asthma study design for mitigation of desert dust health effects: implementation of novel methods for assessment of air pollution exposure and lessons learned.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets