4.8 Article

Lowering Urinary Phthalate Metabolite Concentrations among Children by Reducing Contaminated Dust in Housing Units: A Randomized Controlled Trial and Observational Study

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 54, 期 7, 页码 4327-4335

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.9b04898

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences [R01 ES024381, P01 ES011261, R01 ES014575, R01 ES020349, P42 ES013660]
  2. US Environmental Protection Agency [RD-83544201]
  3. US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dust in homes can contain phthalates that may adversely affect child development, but whether residential interventions and dust removal can prevent children's exposure to phthalates is unknown. We quantified the influence of a residential lead hazard intervention and dust control on children's urinary phthalate metabolite concentrations. Between 2003 and 2006, The Health Outcomes and Measures of the Environment (HOME) Study randomized 355 pregnant women to receive an intervention to reduce either residential lead or injury hazards before delivery. We quantified eight urinary phthalate metabolites from 288 children at ages 1, 2, or 3 years (680 observations). During yearly home visits, we assessed dust accumulation in housing units. Children in the lead intervention group had 11-12% lower concentrations of the sum of di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate metabolites, monocarboxyoctyl phthalate, and monocarboxynonyl phthalate compared to the injury intervention group. Monoethyl phthalate concentrations did not differ by group. In observational analyses, children living in housing units that appeared clean had 12-17% lower concentrations of these phthalate metabolites and monobenzyl phthalate, compared to children living in housing units with more dust accumulation. Features of this lead hazard intervention and measures to control dust may reduce children's exposure to phthalates found in building materials and household furnishings.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据