4.6 Article

Prevalence and socioeconomic associations of asthma and allergic rhinitis in nothern Africa

Journal

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL
Volume 28, Issue 4, Pages 756-762

Publisher

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY SOC JOURNALS LTD
DOI: 10.1183/09031936.06.00089005

Keywords

allergic rhinitis; asthma epidemiology; Cairo; population health; socioeconomic; wheeze

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The alms of the current study were to ascertain the prevalence of asthma and allergic rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms in Cairo, Egypt (nothern Africa), and to elucidate the socioeconomic factors associated with symptom prevalence and severity. A translated and adapted version of the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC) questionnaire was distributed to a sample of 2,645 11-15-yr-olds in state and fee-paying schools in Cairo. The overall prevalences of wheeze ever, wheeze during the last year and physician-diagnosed asthma were 26.5% (697 out of 2,631), 14.7% (379 out of 2,570) and 9.4% (246 out of 2,609), respectively. The prevalence of rhinoconjunctivitis was 15.3% (399 out of 2,616). Asthma symptoms were independently associated with attendance at a state school, parental asthma, age, history of rhinitis and owning a pet cat. Rhinoconjunctivitis was independently associated with attendance at a state school, father's education, parental history of asthma, asthma symptoms and owning a pet cat. In spite of a higher prevalence of severe asthma symptoms in state schools prevalence of physician diagnosis of asthma was the same in both school types, suggesting inequalities in access to healthcare. In conclusion, the prevalence of physician-diagnosed asthma in Cairo was 9.4%, while the prevalence of rhinoconjunctivitis was 15.3%. There is a higher prevalence and increased severity of asthma symptoms in children of lower socioeconomic groups, as defined by state school attendance in Cairo.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available