Yeah! Your beloved energypedia has a new look and design. We have updated the software so that the new energypedia is responsive and more user-friendly. Have a look at the platform and if you encounter any bugs or page distortions, please send them to us at info@energypedia.info.

Publication - Pregnancy Outcomes and Ethanol Cook Stove Intervention: A Randomized-Controlled Trial in Ibadan, Nigeria

From energypedia
Revision as of 19:42, 25 February 2018 by ***** (***** | *****) (Created page with "{{Pub Database |Pub Title=Pregnancy Outcomes and Ethanol Cook Stove Intervention: A Randomized-Controlled Trial in Ibadan, Nigeria |Pub Organization=Environment International ...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

►Add a New Publication
►See All Latest Publications

Title
Pregnancy Outcomes and Ethanol Cook Stove Intervention: A Randomized-Controlled Trial in Ibadan, Nigeria
Publisher
Environment International
Author
Donee A. Alexandera, Amanda Northcrossb, Theodore Karrisone, Oludare Morhasson-Bellod, Nathaniel Wilsonc, Omolola M.Atalabif, Anindita Duttaa, Damilola Adug, Tope Ibigbamig, John Olamijulog, Dayo Adepojug, Oladosu Ojengbeded, Christopher O.Olopade
Published in
February 2018
Abstract
Abstract

Background:

Household air pollution (HAP) exposure has been linked to adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Objectives:

A randomized controlled trial was undertaken in Ibadan, Nigeria to determine the impact of cooking with ethanol on pregnancy outcomes.

Methods:

Three-hundred-twenty-four pregnant women were randomized to either the control (continued cooking using kerosene/firewood stove, n = 162) or intervention group (received ethanol stove, n = 162). Primary outcome variables were birthweight, preterm delivery, intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), and occurrence of miscarriage/stillbirth.

Results:

Mean birthweights for ethanol and controls were 3076 and 2988 g, respectively; the difference, 88 g, (95% confidence interval: − 18 g to 194 g), was not statistically significant (p = 0.10). After adjusting for covariates, the difference reached significance (p = 0.020). Rates of preterm delivery were 6.7% (ethanol) and 11.0% (control), (p = 0.22). Number of miscarriages was 1(ethanol) vs. 4 (control) and stillbirths was 3 (ethanol) vs. 7 (control) (both non-significant). Average gestational age at delivery was significantly (p = 0.015) higher in ethanol-users (39.2 weeks) compared to controls (38.2 weeks). Perinatal mortality (stillbirths and neonatal deaths) was twice as high in controls compared to ethanol-users (7.9% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.045, after adjustment for covariates). We did not detect significant differences in exposure levels between the two treatment arms, perhaps due to large seasonal effects and high ambient air pollution levels.

Conclusions:

Transition from traditional biomass/kerosene fuel to ethanol reduced adverse pregnancy outcomes. However, the difference in birthweight was statistically significant only after covariate adjustment and the other significant differences were in tertiary endpoints. Our results are suggestive of a beneficial effect of ethanol use. Larger trials are required to validate these findings.
URL

Admin:
No