Individual-level interventions to reduce personal exposure to outdoor air pollution and their effects on people with long-term respiratory conditions

Piloting co-developed behaviour change interventions to reduce exposure to air pollution and improve self-reported asthma-related health

BACKGROUND

Exposure to air pollution can exacerbate asthma with immediate and long-term health consequences. Behaviour changes can reduce exposure to air pollution, yet its 'invisible' nature often leaves individuals unaware of their exposure, complicating the identification of appropriate behaviour modifications. Moreover, making health behaviour changes can be challenging, necessitating additional support from healthcare professionals.

OBJECTIVE

This pilot study used personal exposure monitoring, data feedback, and co-developed behaviour change interventions with individuals with asthma, with the goal of reducing personal exposure to PM2.5 and subsequently improving asthma-related health.

METHODS

Twenty-eight participants conducted baseline exposure monitoring for one-week, simultaneously keeping asthma symptom and medication diaries (previously published in McCarron et al., 2023). Participants were then randomised into control (n = 8) or intervention (n = 9) groups. Intervention participants received PM2.5 exposure feedback and worked with researchers to co-develop behaviour change interventions based on a health behaviour change programme which they implemented during the follow-up monitoring week. Control group participants received no feedback or intervention during the study.

RESULTS

All interventions focused on the home environment. Intervention group participants reduced their at-home exposure by an average of 5.7 µg/m³ over the monitoring week (-23.0 to +3.2 µg/m³), whereas the control group had a reduction of 4.7 µg/m³ (-15.6 to +0.4 µg/m³). Furthermore, intervention group participants experienced a 4.6% decrease in participant-hours with reported asthma symptoms, while the control group saw a 0.5% increase. Similarly, the intervention group's asthma-related quality of life improved compared to the control group.

IMPACT STATEMENT

This pilot study investigated a novel behaviour change intervention, utilising personal exposure monitoring, data feedback, and co-developed interventions guided by a health behaviour change programme. The study aimed to reduce personal exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and improve self-reported asthma-related health. Conducting a randomised controlled trial with 28 participants, co-developed intervention successfully targeted exposure peaks within participants' home microenvironments, resulting in a reduction in at-home personal exposure to PM2.5 and improving self-reported asthma-related health. The study contributes valuable insights into the environmental exposure-health relationship and highlights the potential of the intervention for individual-level decision-making to protect human health.

A scoping review of wildfire smoke risk communications: issues, gaps, and recommendations

BACKGROUND

Wildfire smoke exposure has become a growing public health concern, as megafires and fires at the wildland urban interface increase in incidence and severity. Smoke contains many pollutants that negatively impact health and is linked to a number of health complications and chronic diseases. Communicating effectively with the public, especially at-risk populations, to reduce their exposure to this environmental pollutant has become a public health priority. Although wildfire smoke risk communication research has also increased in the past decade, best practice guidance is limited, and most health communications do not adhere to health literacy principles: readability, accessibility, and actionability. This scoping review identifies peer-reviewed studies about wildfire smoke risk communications to identify gaps in research and evaluation of communications and programs that seek to educate the public.

METHODS

Four hundred fifty-one articles were identified from Web of Science and PubMed databases. After screening, 21 articles were included in the final sample for the abstraction process and qualitative thematic analysis. Ten articles were based in the US, with the other half in Australia, Canada, Italy, and other countries. Fifteen articles examined communication materials and messaging recommendations. Eight papers described communication delivery strategies. Eleven articles discussed behavior change. Six articles touched on risk communications for vulnerable populations; findings were limited and called for increasing awareness and prioritizing risk communications for at-risk populations.

RESULTS

This scoping review found limited studies describing behavior change to reduce wildfire smoke exposure, characteristics of effective communication materials and messaging, and communication delivery strategies. Literature on risk communications, dissemination, and behavior change for vulnerable populations was even more limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations include providing risk communications that are easy-to-understand and adapted to specific needs of at-risk groups. Communications should provide a limited number of messages that include specific actions for avoiding smoke exposure. Effective communications should use mixed media formats and a wide variety of dissemination strategies. There is a pressing need for more intervention research and effectiveness evaluation of risk communications about wildfire smoke exposure, and more development and dissemination of risk communications for both the general public and vulnerable populations.

From Raising Awareness to a Behavioural Change: A Case Study of Indoor Air Quality Improvement Using IoT and COM-B Model

The topic of indoor air pollution has yet to receive the same level of attention as ambient pollution. We spend considerable time indoors, and poorer indoor air quality affects most of us, particularly people with respiratory and other health conditions. There is a pressing need for methodological case studies focusing on informing households about the causes and harms of indoor air pollution and supporting changes in behaviour around different indoor activities that cause it. The use of indoor air quality (IAQ) sensor data to support behaviour change is the focus of our research in this paper. We have conducted two studies-first, to evaluate the effectiveness of the IAQ data visualisation as a trigger for the natural reflection capability of human beings to raise awareness. This study was performed without the scaffolding of a formal behaviour change model. In the second study, we showcase how a behaviour psychology model, COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation-Behaviour), can be operationalised as a means of digital intervention to support behaviour change. We have developed four digital interventions manifested through a digital platform. We have demonstrated that it is possible to change behaviour concerning indoor activities using the COM-B model. We have also observed a measurable change in indoor air quality. In addition, qualitative analysis has shown that the awareness level among occupants has improved due to our approach of utilising IoT sensor data with COM-B-based digital interventions.

Ambient Air Pollution and Stroke: An Updated Review

Despite recent advances in treatment and prevention, stroke remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. There is a critical need to identify novel modifiable risk factors for disease, including environmental agents. A body of evidence has accumulated suggesting that elevated levels of ambient air pollutants may not only trigger cerebrovascular events in susceptible people (short-term exposures) but also increase the risk of future events (long-term average exposures). This review assesses the updated evidence for both short and long-term exposure to ambient air pollution as a risk factor for stroke incidence and outcomes. It discusses the potential pathophysiologic mechanisms and makes recommendations to mitigate exposure on a personal and community level. The evidence indicates that reduction in air pollutant concentrations represent a significant population-level opportunity to reduce risk of cerebrovascular disease.

Air Pollution and the Heart: Updated Evidence from Meta-analysis Studies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although environmental exposure such as air pollution is detrimental to cardiovascular disease (CVD), the effects of different air pollutants on different CVD endpoints produced variable findings. We provide updated evidence between air pollutants and CVD outcomes including mitigation strategies with meta-analytic evidence.

RECENT FINDINGS

An increased exposure to any class of air pollutants including particulate matter (PM), gas, toxic metals, and disruptive chemicals has been associated with CVD events. Exposure to PM < 2.5 μm has been consistently associated with most heart diseases and stroke as well as CVDs among at-risk individuals. Despite this, there is no clinical approach available for systemic evaluation of air pollution exposure and management. A large number of epidemiological evidence clearly suggests the importance of air pollution prevention and control for reducing the risk of CVDs and mortality. Cost-effective and feasible strategies for air pollution monitoring, screening, and necessary interventions are urgently required among at-risk populations and those living or working, or frequently commuting in polluted areas.

Individual-level interventions to reduce personal exposure to outdoor air pollution and their effects on people with long-term respiratory conditions

BACKGROUND

More than 90% of the global population lives in areas exceeding World Health Organization air quality limits. More than four million people each year are thought to die early due to air pollution, and poor air quality is thought to reduce an average European's life expectancy by one year. Individuals may be able to reduce health risks through interventions such as masks, behavioural changes and use of air quality alerts. To date, evidence is lacking about the efficacy and safety of such interventions for the general population and people with long-term respiratory conditions. This topic, and the review question relating to supporting evidence to avoid or lessen the effects of air pollution, emerged directly from a group of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in South London, UK.

OBJECTIVES

1. To assess the efficacy, safety and acceptability of individual-level interventions that aim to help people with or without chronic respiratory conditions to reduce their exposure to outdoor air pollution. 2. To assess the efficacy, safety and acceptability of individual-level interventions that aim to help people with chronic respiratory conditions reduce the personal impact of outdoor air pollution and improve health outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified studies from the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and other major databases. We did not restrict our searches by date, language or publication type and included a search of the grey literature (e.g. unpublished information). We conducted the most recent search on 16 October 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies (NRS) that included a comparison treatment arm, in adults and children that investigated the effectiveness of an individual-level intervention to reduce risks of outdoor air pollution. We included studies in healthy individuals and those in people with long-term respiratory conditions. We excluded studies which focused on non-respiratory long-term conditions, such as cardiovascular disease. We did not restrict eligibility of studies based on outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted study characteristics and outcome data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs and the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) as appropriate. One review author entered data into the review; this was spot-checked by a second author. We planned to meta-analyse results from RCTs and NRS separately, using a random-effects model. This was not possible, so we presented evidence narratively. We assessed certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. Primary outcomes were: measures of air pollution exposure; exacerbation of respiratory conditions; hospital admissions; quality of life; and serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 11 studies (3372 participants) meeting our inclusion criteria (10 RCTs and one NRS). Participants' ages ranged from 18 to 74 years, and the duration of studies ranged from 24 hours to 104 weeks. Six cross-over studies recruited healthy adults and five parallel studies included either people with pre-existing conditions (three studies) or only pregnant women (two studies). Interventions included masks (e.g. an N95 mask designed to filter out airborne particles) (five studies), an alternative cycle route (one study), air quality alerts and education (five studies). Studies were set in Australia, China, Iran, the UK, and the USA. Due to the diversity of study designs, populations, interventions and outcomes, we did not perform any meta-analyses and instead summarised results narratively. We judged both RCTs and the NRS to be at risk of bias from lack of blinding and lack of clarity regarding selection methods. Many studies did not provide a prepublished protocol or trial registration. From five studies (184 participants), we found that masks or altered cycle routes may have little or no impact on physiological markers of air pollution exposure (e.g. blood pressure and heart rate variability), but we are very uncertain about this estimate using the GRADE approach. We found conflicting evidence regarding health care usage from three studies of air pollution alerts, with one non-randomised cross-over trial (35 participants) reporting an increase in emergency hospital attendances and admissions, but the other two randomised parallel trials (1553 participants) reporting little to no difference. We also gave the evidence for this outcome a very uncertain GRADE rating. None of our included trials reported respiratory exacerbations, quality of life or serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes were not well reported, but indicated inconsistent impacts of air quality alerts and education interventions on adherence, with some trials reporting improvements in the intervention groups and others reporting little or no difference. Symptoms were reported by three trials, with one randomised cross-over trial (15 participants) reporting a small increase in breathing difficulties associated with the mask intervention, one non-randomised cross-over trial (35 participants) reporting reduced throat and nasal irritation in the lower-pollution cycle route group (but no clear difference in other respiratory symptoms), and another randomised parallel trial (519 participants) reporting no clear difference in symptoms between those who received a smog warning and those who did not.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The lack of evidence and study diversity has limited the conclusions of this review. Using a mask or a lower-pollution cycle route may mitigate some of the physiological impacts from air pollution, but evidence was very uncertain. We found conflicting results for other outcomes, including health care usage, symptoms and adherence/behaviour change. We did not find evidence for adverse events. Funders should consider commissioning larger, longer studies, using high-quality and well-described methods, recruiting participants with pre-existing respiratory conditions. Studies should report outcomes of importance to people with respiratory conditions, such as exacerbations, hospital admissions, quality of life and adverse events.